Apache JMeter vs. NGINX

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
JMeter
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
JMeter, from Apache, is a load and performance testing tool.N/A
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
NGINX, a business unit of F5 Networks, powers over 65% of the world's busiest websites and web applications. NGINX started out as an open source web server and reverse proxy, built to be faster and more efficient than Apache. Over the years, NGINX has built a suite of infrastructure software products o tackle some of the biggest challenges in managing high-transaction applications. NGINX offers a suite of products to form the core of what organizations need to create…N/A
Pricing
Apache JMeterNGINX
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
JMeterNGINX
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache JMeterNGINX
Considered Both Products
JMeter
Chose JMeter
Postman is really more about API testing, and was never aimed at performance/monitoring the way Apache JMeter does. If you find someone trying to use postman this way... show them the way!
Chose JMeter
More threads supported, open-source, more reliable, and easy to work with. The User interface is very elegant and simple to use, as compared to other competitors.
Chose JMeter
It is very costlier than Jmeter to manager for a multi-seat license. All company does not procure the license for costlier tools. Maintaining Load Runner scripts is difficult than JMeter scripts. You need skill resources to create and maintain the Loadrunner scripts and tools. …
Chose JMeter
Although Selenium is designed for automating real-world tests in browser and JMeter is designed to perform load testing, in some cases, JMeter based tests may be enough to verify application functionality. These products don't directly compete with each other and it should be …
Chose JMeter
SoapUI is a bit easier to get rolling for people without development skills but if you have people with development skills JMeter shines. JMeter also uses significantly fewer resources on the client so you can be sure your testing isn’t restricted by the client machine.
Chose JMeter
Best open-source performance testing tool. JMeter has no alternative for performance testing. It is really easy to record and enhance scripts using this tool. It provides lots of free plugins which gives us much flexibility. It can be executed using GUI or non-GUI. Good tool …
Chose JMeter
It's very easy GUI helps the tester to perform various testing scenarios. Easy to configure test cases and modules which has proper and well-maintained documentation. Its an excellent tool for performance testing and running a variety of load tests, stress tests, and longevity …
Chose JMeter
The main and best thing is that it's an open source tool with the biggest community worldwide.
Chose JMeter
The recorder provided by JMeter is ok and if your team has no idea about programming you can use it to test your web apps without writing any code.
Chose JMeter
It has very powerful capabilities and for free!!! It's ease of use and installation and easy to get started are highlights. A lot of community support and youtube videos from JMeter developers to help you understand various functionalities within JMeter to support you. You can …
Chose JMeter
Jmeter is better for projecting a path to look into. Crystal only allows you to pull the specific data and display a set of data that you request. Jmeter allows you to feel out the direction the data is going as you go. Crystal also can have issues with graphing data correctly.
Chose JMeter
I have evaluated LOADUI (web free version) and it was a very unstable tool and I could not rely on those results completely as I was not sure how the tool was performing. It only generated the top 10 less transaction times and when Jmeter was in use, it was very effective in …
Chose JMeter
LoadRunner and Silk Test were the tools I used in the past to compare with JMeter. I thought LoadRunner had a more commercial appearance and it comes with HP support from your service provider. It also comes at a steep price. JMeter and LoadRunner have a similar learning curve …
Chose JMeter
It is best open source tool available in the market . Also it is easy to train resources and is also very useful for integration testing.
Chose JMeter
We found BlazeMeter's service to fit great with our JMeter scripts, since they execute our JMeter scripts and provide excellent reporting tools and graphs, besides multi region and infrastructure to support different configurations of multiple concurrent users. I have used HP …
Chose JMeter
No licensing issue. Many blogs provide the issue noticed and resolution for the same hence no need to pay heavy maintenance fees.
Chose JMeter
I have used LoadStorm. But, with JMeter we have advantages for it being open source, as lot of our clients don't have the budget to invest in tools. It can be used to write complex scripts, multithreading framework allows concurrent sampling by many threads and simultaneous …
Chose JMeter
JMeter has a lot more functionality than Selenum. Also JMeter is better for backend or API testing, while Selenium is good for UI tests.
Chose JMeter
NeoLoad is far ahead of JMeter in terms of reporting and user interface, the turn around time is less compared to JMeter as there are enough experts in market.
Chose JMeter
Java script friendly.
Chose JMeter
Besides JMeter, we've looked at WebLOAD and Gatling. Our organization used to use WebLOAD and we switched to JMeter at our division for its ease of use and configurability compared to WebLOAD. However, we will eventually switch to Gatling because Gatling provides greater …
Chose JMeter
Gatling is the future. JMeter is good, Gatling is better.
NGINX
Chose NGINX
NGINX is more expensive than HA Proxy.
Chose NGINX
The support and ability to provide near zero downtime for changes is a winner. The lightweight engine also helps reduce cost.
Chose NGINX
Apache HTTP Server, Apache Tomcat and Microsoft IIS
Chose NGINX
Easy to Install and configure.
Pick the configuration dynamically without restarting
All the configurations at one place
Chose NGINX
NGINX is faster to deploy and it has minimal setup needs for our POCs over Apache Tomcat
Chose NGINX
How does it compare? We use Apache ATP server and we also use Tom Cat also owned by Apache, but both Apache, ATP, and MKA. They are relatively older than GX and so they're one problem for Apache and MKA they need more power, more memory, and more space.
Chose NGINX
NGINX have higher market share which obviously show to us it is the preferred choice of most of the customers. Both of platform competes in the Web and Application server areas, but due the security features of NGINX be more flexible this in my opinion makes more sense.
Chose NGINX
It is like comparing a formula 1 car against a regular street car in terms of performance or installation simplicity
Chose NGINX
Apache is a market leader but NGINX is new and has new features. Lightweight and can handle static requests. We use EC2 and I believe NGINX is more suited when it comes to scalability.
Chose NGINX
Imperva Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Chose NGINX
NGINX is more stable and scaleable than Imperva Application Delivery.
Chose NGINX
NGINX is faster and easier to configure. It has better reverse proxy features which is much easy to configure.
Chose NGINX
MS IIS and Apache HTTP server both provide many similar services. However the configuration simplicity, and performance characteristics helped us choose NGINX above the other 2 products.
Chose NGINX
I have found that [NGINX] seems to perform better throughout the years with less issues although I've used Apache more. I would definitely recommend [NGINX] for any high volume site and I've seen this to usually be the case from most provided web hosts who will pick [NGINX] …
Chose NGINX
Nginx is much more lightweight than apache HTTP.
Chose NGINX
NGINX Stacks up at the top for me because it's fast, reliable, and secure and apache is also usable but not so good in comparison to NGINX and since I and my organization have switched to NGINX I also don't want to look back at apache as NGINX works the best for our use case …
Chose NGINX
NGINX's footprint is much smaller than Apache, and it's great for serving up static content. The URL rewriting was not as familiar as Apache, but just as powerful once configured correctly. As a load balancer, it's much more affordable than Citrix ADC. We used the load …
Chose NGINX
Compared to Apache, NGINX is much lighter on resource consumption, and also far faster as a server, serving static content over twice as fast in most benchmark tests. NGINX doesn't offer as much potential configuration and customization as Apache, however, so if these advanced …
Chose NGINX
Nginx's cache mechanism is better than Apache and HAproxy. Also Nginx is very light weight and works for multiple sites with much less work. i.e. As front end proxy server configuration is very easy as compared to other applications. Apache sometimes crashes and is not able to …
Chose NGINX
Nginx is way easier to configure and runs better than Microsoft’s offering, in my opinion, and I’ll take it over Apache for its simplicity.
Features
Apache JMeterNGINX
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
Apache JMeter
7.5
Ratings
11% below category average
NGINX
-
Ratings
End to end performance management9.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated performance data8.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility6.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Real time monitoring8.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection4.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Application Servers
Comparison of Application Servers features of Product A and Product B
Apache JMeter
-
Ratings
NGINX
7.8
Ratings
2% below category average
IDE support00 Ratings7.20 Ratings
Security management00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Administration and management00 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Application server performance00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Installation00 Ratings9.70 Ratings
Open-source standards compliance00 Ratings7.00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache JMeterNGINX
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Apache HTTP Server
Apache HTTP Server
Score 8.4 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Score 7.8 out of 10
Enterprises
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Score 7.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache JMeterNGINX
Likelihood to Recommend
8.1
(0 ratings)
8.8
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.6
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
1.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.1
(0 ratings)
Online Training
1.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache JMeterNGINX
Likelihood to Recommend
The key questions I would pose are: how high of a concurrent load do you need to generate against the system? How technically skilled are your personnel that will perform the load testing? How much programmable/scripting/code based control do you desire from the tool? Do you prefer more of a GUI based tool or a programmatic code/scripting based tool? JMeter will be for those that want a GUI, moderate to low scripting/code based control/programmability, moderate to low load generation, and for users experienced in the novice to expert range.
Read full review
Nginx is well suited for serving any static content - whether that be images, JS files, HTML files, CSS files, videos, etc. If you have a high-traffic website, Nginx will be a great fit because it handles large number of requests extremely efficiently. Nginx has full support on Unix systems, but only has limited support on Microsoft Windows machines.
Read full review
Pros
  • Easy to construct Webservices script - You just need to add a sampler with the endpoint, payload and header information. And boom you can run a load test on the service with varying load and capture the response time and throughput. In a commercial tool like Loadrunner or Silkperformer, this process would take at least couple of hours, while with Jmeter we can do this in 10 minutes or less.
  • Modularizing the scripts - Jmeter has a very good way of organizing the scripts and the reusability of the existing script (transactions) is also as easy as copy pasting the script.
  • Jmeter tests can be run from anywhere, so you can run it from the idle webserver itself if you have some firewall restrictions to test it from your local or other environment.
  • Jmeter distributed tests can be spawn from the AWS and results collated to see the performance from different regions in the world.
Read full review
  • Straight-forward configuration format that users of all skill levels can learn, and yet is powerful enough for the huge breadth of features that Nginx provides.
  • Massive scale right out the box. We've never had a Nginx instance overwhelmed by requests, and if we did it would be trivial to spin up more Nginx instances to handle the load.
  • SSL termination means that we can deliver content over HTTPS without needing our individual services to require TLS support. This saves us a lot of time and headache while keeping us secure.
  • Nginx is open-source and free, meaning that anyone can use it to power their services, from individual projects to billion-dollar websites.
Read full review
Cons
  • Even though it has very easy installation, you can run into issues easily. I was ab;e to trigger a test at browser level but couldn't stop the tests. I had to kill it from task manager and then had to reinstall from begining.
  • There are so many things in JMeter you can do especially with the sampler for selenium for UI tests. More documentation/webinars etc.. would help the community better.
  • The jmx files should have an easy way to be integrated with ci/cd tools and cloud.
Read full review
  • Nginx often requires some initial configuration. It's worth doing, because you'll end up with great results, but it can be slightly daunting for someone to get started using it. Apache might have a leg up in that regard--When you install Apache, typically it's just about ready to do what you want already. But the issue with Apache is that most people skip the extensive tuning phase required after that, and with nginx it becomes more just a part of the configuration process.
  • Sometimes, the configuration syntax, even though it's powerful and terse, isn't the most intuitive. Luckily there's plenty of documentation about what things mean and how to accomplish certain things. There may not be much that can be done about this--to have a powerful web server, you need a powerful-enough configuration language.
  • The nginx brand is somewhat fragmented, and it can be confusing. There's the open source nginx web server, which I've primarily been referring to. But then there's NGINX Plus, a premium subscription-based service which works with a range of other NGINX products (NGINX WAF, NGINX Amplify, NGINX Controller). I've met a number of people who weren't very familiar with nginx, and instinctively went to nginx.com first, and from there it seems like everything costs money. It's only when they realize there's a different site, nginx.org, that they find what they went looking for.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Price, Wiki and user sharing. Having access to the information provided by the developers and other open source providers is key for me. The ability to share information and get answers directly is very important to success in software testing. And the price of this product currently is amazing. Too many companies charge way too much money for products that are far behind in their value and pertinence
Read full review
Great value for the product
Read full review
Usability
I can jump right into a new test plan and start building from scratch. The natural progression from test plan to thread group and then designing the basic format of the process is very streamlined and smooth. With only slight modifications I can build out a very complex model from a very basic beginning.
Read full review
Front end proxy and reverse proxy of Nginx is always useful. I always prefer to Nginx in overall usability when you have application server and database or multiple application servers and single database i.e. clustered application. Nginx provides really good features and flexibility which helps the system administrator in case of troubleshooting and also from the administration perspective. Also, Nginx doesn't delay any request because of internal performance issues.
Read full review
Support Rating
I have been using JMeter for the last year. By using this tool, you can make sure the system will work under varied loads. It helps us to simulate real time scenarios by creating required virtual users and make sure the application will work under load. Perform load, stress, and stability testing using JMeter.
Read full review
Community support is great, and they've also had a presence at conferences. Overall, there is no shortage of documentation and community support. We're currently using it to serve up some WordPress sites, and configuring NGINX for this purpose is well documented.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
I have evaluated LOADUI (web free version) and it was a very unstable tool and I could not rely on those results completely as I was not sure how the tool was performing. It only generated the top 10 less transaction times and when Jmeter was in use, it was very effective in using plugins to accommodate more outputs.
Read full review
I have found that [NGINX] seems to perform better throughout the years with less issues although I've used Apache more. I would definitely recommend [NGINX] for any high volume site and I've seen this to usually be the case from most provided web hosts who will pick [NGINX] over alternatives
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • It helped to estimate resources required for a particular client requirement. For example if the client wants the application to be used by 500 users for 1 hour, based on the load test we perform for 500 users and 1 hour we recommend resources and their capabilities.
  • Jmeter was used to identify bottleneck. This would lead to better performance.
  • Jmeter was used to identify failures as well.
Read full review
  • When we first migrated our primary bidding environment architecture to Nginx, it was under duress due to Apache's inability to keep up when we consolidated away from an HAproxy model to a central HTTP proxy. So we even when we did not know what we were doing, we were able to make it work in a bad situation, and everyone was quite happy.
  • The biggest complaint I have is that I find the module compilation requirements for nginx+ rather burdensome. If we pay for Nginx+, I'd love to see then have pre-built modules for ready for each release of more modules. We are spending our own time engineering an in-house solution for module testing for nginx+ releases, which is disappointing.
  • I've also, as the primary Nginx person at my organization, inserted my expertise into other projects, and have saved our company lots of money getting rid of big $$$ appliances for general SSL proxying.
  • Speaking of Nginx replacing SSL appliances, we had an instance where we had to suddenly enable elliptic-curve SSL ciphers and our big $$$ appliances (you know who they are), were falling over. Even their SSL accelerator cards, after all, are just a few extra cores to process SSL. But in an environment of our size, we use DNS to spread the load to hundreds of frontend proxies with dozens of cores each to spread this load out, all at a lower price than ONE of the appliance pairs running Nginx. We couldn't even tell the change in load in our Nginx architecture when we enabled the ciphers.
Read full review
ScreenShots

NGINX Screenshots

Screenshot of Overview of the NGINX Application PlatformScreenshot of NGINX Controller - MonitoringScreenshot of NGINX Controller - Configuration