Hyperbrowser vs Notte

Browser Benchmark Comparison · Updated October 30, 2026

Hyperbrowser
Ahead in
2of 2 benchmarks
#7 of 7 in Browser Composite
vs
Notte
Ahead in
0of 2 benchmarks
#5 of 7 in Browser Composite

Hyperbrowser was ahead in both shared browser benchmarks.

Head to head

  • Browser lifecycleTotal lifecycle time · lower is better
    Hyperbrowser faster2.42x
    Hyperbrowser
    0.69s
    Notte
    1.67s
  • Browser throughputActions per second · higher is better
    Hyperbrowser higher throughput2.10x
    Hyperbrowser
    2.79 actions/s66%
    Notte
    1.33 actions/s

Browser lifecycle

October 30, 2026
Full leaderboard

Hyperbrowser

100% success
Median
0.69s
p95
0.72s
p99
0.73s
Hyperbrowser Browser lifecycle results

Notte

100% success
Median
1.67s
p95
1.90s
p99
1.95s
Notte Browser lifecycle results

Median total lifecycle time over time

30 runs · June 30, 2026 to October 30, 2026
HyperbrowserNotte

Browser throughput

Full leaderboard

Hyperbrowser

66% success · October 16, 2026
Median
2.79 actions/s
p95
3.63 actions/s
p99
3.77 actions/s
Hyperbrowser Browser throughput results

Notte

100% success · October 9, 2026
Median
1.33 actions/s
p95
1.47 actions/s
p99
1.48 actions/s
Notte Browser throughput results

Median actions per second over time

22 runs · July 7, 2026 to October 30, 2026
HyperbrowserNotte
Work at Hyperbrowser or Notte? See where you stand every day, with full run logs, not just on benchmark Friday.Get stealth benchmarks →

Methodology

  • One workload, every provider. The same script, payload, and model hit every provider, addressed the way its own API expects. Nobody gets a tuned or special path.
  • Repeated on a schedule. Every suite runs many iterations per provider, automated on a recurring schedule, so results reflect steady state rather than one lucky request.
  • Raw results published. Every run is committed as JSON to the public benchmarks repo, next to the code that produced it. Nothing is cherry-picked or held back.
  • How this comparison is built. Each benchmark compares the two providers' medians; results within 5% count as roughly even. A comparison is published only when both providers completed at least 50% of runs in 2 or more shared benchmarks run in the last 30 days. If a provider’s latest run of a benchmark failed, its most recent successful run from that window is used instead.
Read the full methodology →Raw results on GitHub ↗

Frequently asked questions

Have another question? Email us.

Hyperbrowser was ahead in both shared browser benchmarks. In Browser lifecycle (October 30, 2026), Hyperbrowser had a median total lifecycle time of 0.69s versus 1.67s for Notte, 2.42x faster. In Browser throughput (October 9, 2026), Hyperbrowser had a median actions per second of 2.79 actions/s versus 1.33 actions/s for Notte, 2.10x higher throughput.

PartnersGoogle Cloud Run