Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CucumberStudio vs GitHub CoPilot comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

CucumberStudio
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
27th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (7th)
GitHub CoPilot
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
AI Code Assistants (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Rapid Application Development Software category, the mindshare of CucumberStudio is 0.1%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub CoPilot is 5.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Rapid Application Development Software
 

Featured Reviews

Walter Wirch - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates integration of test scenarios while needing modernization of components
CucumberStudio is primarily used for designing test scenarios and automating testing. We have implemented it in conjunction with our own routines for integration into our infrastructure CucumberStudio aligns with our strategy for data-driven testing. It supports our product owners in designing…
TarunRevalla - PeerSpot reviewer
Saves time with context-aware code suggestions and seamless integration
In terms of improvements for Copilot, I haven't considered much since it offers many useful interactions. It integrates well with GitHub repositories, tracks changes on PRs, and provides valuable suggestions where applicable. There is excellent support across various code editors like JetBrains, VS Code, and NeoGen. I also run many automations within GitHub. When an NPR is raised, it automatically provides suggestions, which is part of the enterprise edition without limitations. While I don't see immediate room for improvement, one suggestion is for Copilot to provide specific suggestions for certain lines of code instead of rewriting entire sections. If the tool could focus on specific lines where changes are suggested, it would save time and reduce server load.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"CucumberStudio has a very user-friendly interface."
"The best thing is that a person without knowledge about the program can easily understand what happened in our testing process."
"The URL is very useful, and it has a very good UI for deploying information of the scenarios created."
"CucumberStudio aligns with our strategy for data-driven testing."
"The solution is stable."
"CucumberStudio aligns with our strategy for data-driven testing."
"The data table that helps in converting a single script to multiple test cases is very helpful."
"The initial setup of the product is easy."
"The solution's most valuable features are context awareness, multi language support, integration with popular IDs like Visual Studio Code or JetBrains, and reduced coding time."
"The platform's most valuable feature is detecting and suggesting variables based on the existing file context."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"I use it almost like a search engine, but it goes a step beyond."
"The product's initial setup is straightforward because it's pushed through the updates."
"The most valuable aspects in terms of features, revolve around its code generation capabilities."
"In terms of understanding user queries and providing code that aligns with my expectations, there is room for improvement."
 

Cons

"Another kind of deployment might be useful, perhaps an option to install the tool in a local deployment."
"A key area for improvement is to revamp outdated components such as HipTest publisher."
"The reporting needs to be improved."
"I think it would be better if we could also do the reporting with CucumberStudio."
"A key area for improvement is to revamp outdated components such as HipTest publisher."
"I would like to see better customer support."
"One drawback is that the solution sometimes suggests unwanted code, especially if I accidentally press the tab. This doesn't happen often. Sometimes it seems to understand my code, but other times it doesn't. This inconsistency is confusing."
"The only suggestion is to enhance Copilot's ability to assist developers with infrastructure as code tasks. Like, while using CI/CD pipeline, when I use YAML files, so it could just support the port number."
"In certain instances, OpenAI didn't respond in the expected way. The responses were more general and didn't address the specific point."
"They could enhance the product's accuracy of suggestions, especially when dealing with non-standard or legacy code."
"They could simplify the API integrations and allow us to automate certain tasks using our own server without just logging into the web page."
"The tool needs to focus on integration, as it is the most important aspect. I would like to see some pre-designed modules included in my projects."
"The problem arises when a bot is not well-designed, which frustrates customers."
"The limitation is based on the training dataset and the number of repositories."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The product has a tiered pricing model that starts with a free version for individual developers but requires a separate license fee for enterprise use."
"We have a license but need another one for the GitHub CoPilot tool."
"GitHub CoPilot comes readily available for enterprise customers, so it's a free add-on if you already have GitHub's enterprise license."
"GitHub Copilot is a paid service, costing approximately $6 per month. There might be a free trial available."
"Each user needs their license, whether it's a big team or a small team."
"We have a demo license. Once we understand what we'll do, we'll start with a paid license."
"The solution is costly."
"A personal license is priced at ten dollars per month, while a professional or enterprise license costs nineteen dollars per user, and these rates are consistent for all users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
838,640 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Hiptest?
The best thing is that a person without knowledge about the program can easily understand what happened in our testing process.
What needs improvement with Hiptest?
Another kind of deployment might be useful, perhaps an option to install the tool in a local deployment.
What is your primary use case for Hiptest?
CucumberStudio is used to create a scenario of a mobile application that uses behavior-driven development. It is used to create scenarios in software development.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub CoPilot?
They recently made Copilot free to use up to a certain limit, which is a positive change. The pricing aligns with other AI agents like Chargebee and Anthropic Cloud. The ability to switch between m...
What needs improvement with GitHub CoPilot?
In terms of improvements for Copilot, I haven't considered much since it offers many useful interactions. It integrates well with GitHub repositories, tracks changes on PRs, and provides valuable s...
 

Also Known As

Hiptest
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Cardinal Health, Intuit, Smartbox, Accenture, Deliveroo
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CucumberStudio vs. GitHub CoPilot and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,640 professionals have used our research since 2012.