Top 4 Reasons Why ChatGPT Can’t Replace QA Engineers

Kishore R

2 min read

The future is AI, as we all know. And ChatGPT is one of the best AI tools to emerge. ChatGPT is an OpenAI chatbot and trained model still in its testing and training phase by its developers. ChatGPT’s primary goal is to deliver textbox responses that seem genuinely human. It gets mainly used in chatting with chatbots, AI systems, and virtual assistants. It has become more frequent in recent years, providing an alternative to manual QA engineers working on projects. In this blog, we will see the top 4 reasons why ChatGPT won’t replace QA engineers and the manual testing procedures they use.  

Top 4 Reasons Why ChatGPT Can’t Replace QA Engineers

Expertise & Experience in Problem-Solving

QA engineers have unique skills that help them solve problems in the workplace. Because of their knowledge, expertise, and experience, they have a better perception of the quality assurance process than ChatGPT and other AI tools. QA manual engineers use their expansive practical knowledge to acquire a fresh perspective on their work and bring creative solutions to the table. Overall, QA manual engineers are essential resources for successful problem-solving in any business environment because of their skills, experience, and innovation.

An Eye For Spotting Subtle Problems 

In manual testing, QA engineers play a vital and specialized role. These people have the potential to pick up minute problems that ChatGPT and some other automatic checking methods overlook. The complex problem-solving abilities required manual QAs to find bugs or quality problems that may have hidden patterns or be tricky to find using automated methods. Identifying these subtle faults is crucial for a product’s development, and manual QA engineers use their experience and expertise to get this done.

Insights into User Experience

Artificial intelligence cannot replace the QA engineer’s ability to provide invaluable feedback on a user’s experience with a product or service. He will evaluate how user-friendly a software, service, or application is through the eyes of the user, according to the human aspect. However, the AI may be capable of finding errors on the coding side, but it might be obscure about the complexities of how a real user can interact with a product. Additionally, AI lacks empathy, unable to understand how customers feel about their experiences or whether they have benefited from them. Finally, QA applies such unique perspectives to any project, enabling businesses and other organizations to ensure the highest level of quality while releasing their goods.

Bug Identification & Debugging

Debugging code needs QA manual engineers than AI.  QA engineers are better at identifying bugs that only occur in specific situations and are aware of the complexities of how the code works. AI algorithms are excellent at quickly identifying even minor issues and evaluating code based on the training we give. However, while evaluating and analyzing the situations that hamper a system’s overall performance, AI will not always be handy. On the other hand, QA manual engineers are significantly better at handling debug issues than AI because of their background knowledge.

Now these are the top 4 reasons why ChatGPT can’t replace QA engineers! From keeping an eye on how the testing process works to insightfully improving the user experience of the applications built, the tasks of a QA analyst are comprehensive and multi-faceted. 

Sunny Side of Having QA Manual Engineers

Manual testing recreates the user environment, which strongly resembles how users might interact with the product. Because of this, it is possible to detect flaws or defects before the client starts the application. Manual QAs can recognize potential issues and ensure high-quality software through critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and domain-specific knowledge. They can effortlessly adapt and respond to changes in requirements and priorities, with an additional note on valuable feedback in agile environments. The usability and user experience of the product can be evaluated manually by QA engineers from the end user’s perspective. They can provide comments on customer satisfaction, interaction flow, and user interface, which will help to make the software more user-friendly and increases customer perfection. 


In conclusion, we have seen the top 4 reasons why QA manual engineers are superior to regular ChatGPT AI at identifying and reporting bugs. Because of their knowledge and thoroughness, manual engineers have a complete understanding of issues that may outsmart even the finest AI. Additionally, the interaction between an engineer and a user yields valuable feedback on the user experience that AI can’t match. As a result, manual testing is an essential step in product creation. That said, it’s inevitable that we will find ChatGPT helping us to identify diverse product issues and bring impactful changes in testing. But, given the slice of reality that it’s still in the testing and training phase, it’s too early to say that it will replace manual QA engineers. 

Related posts:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *