Testing · head to head
Playwright vs Selenium
Playwright
Testing
Open-source web automation framework for testing and scripting across browsers
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Selenium
Testing
Browser automation framework and the W3C WebDriver standard
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Playwright requires programming language knowledge; not suitable for non-technical QA staff; Selenium flaky tests are the standing complaint: explicit waits and synchronisation are the tester’s job, where newer tools handle it automatically
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Playwright and Selenium actually diverge.
| Attribute | Playwright | Selenium |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | open-source | Open source, no licence fee |
| Platforms | Windows, macOS, Linux | Linux, macOS, Windows, Web |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Testing).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Playwright
Nothing recorded that Selenium does not also cover.
Only in Selenium
- W3C WebDriver
- Many language bindings
- Selenium Grid
- Broad browser support
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Playwright
- End-to-end testing for web applicationsnot Selenium
- Cross-browser compatibility testingnot Selenium
- Accessibility testing and automated screen reader validationnot Selenium
- Web scraping and data extraction automationnot Selenium
- AI agent web automation via MCP integrationnot Selenium
Selenium
- Cross-browser testing where Safari and legacy browsers must be coverednot Playwright
- Teams whose test suites are written in Java or C# rather than JavaScriptnot Playwright
- Distributing a large suite across a grid of machinesnot Playwright
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Playwright
- Requires programming language knowledge; not suitable for non-technical QA staff
- WebKit implementation less mature than Chromium; occasional webkit-specific issues
- Mobile browser testing relies on emulation, not real devices
- No managed cloud infrastructure; users must host CI/CD runners or pay for third-party services
Selenium
- Flaky tests are the standing complaint: explicit waits and synchronisation are the tester’s job, where newer tools handle it automatically
- Setup involves drivers, versions and grid infrastructure that Playwright and Cypress bundle away
- Slower to run than tools that talk to browsers over a debugging protocol rather than WebDriver
Pricing, plan by plan
Playwright
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the Playwright review.
Selenium
Free- SeleniumFree
- Full functionality
- Unlimited tests
- Community support
Which should you pick?
Choose Playwright if
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Windows, macOS, Linux.
Choose Selenium if
- You need w3c webdriver.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Web.
- You also want many language bindings.
Questions people ask
- Is Playwright or Selenium better?
- Neither clearly leads. Playwright starts at Free and Selenium at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Playwright or Selenium?
- Playwright starts at Free and Selenium at Free.
- Does Playwright or Selenium run on more platforms?
- Playwright runs on Windows, macOS, Linux. Selenium runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Web.
- Can I use Playwright for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Playwright best used for?
- Playwright is most often used for end-to-end testing for web applications, cross-browser compatibility testing, accessibility testing and automated screen reader validation, web scraping and data extraction automation. Of those, end-to-end testing for web applications and cross-browser compatibility testing are not what Selenium is typically brought in for.
- What can Playwright do that Selenium cannot?
- Selenium covers W3C WebDriver, Many language bindings, Selenium Grid, Broad browser support.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Playwright: How much does Playwright cost?
Playwright is completely free. It is open-source software available for TypeScript, Python, .NET, and Java with no licensing fees or usage limits.
SourceSelenium: Is Selenium free?
Yes, open source with no licence fee. Paid costs come from grid infrastructure or services like BrowserStack.
Playwright: Is Playwright open-source?
Yes, Playwright is open-source software. The source code is available on GitHub and can be used at no cost with no restrictions on commercial use.
SourceSelenium: Selenium or Playwright?
Playwright handles waiting automatically and is faster to set up, which removes most flakiness complaints. Selenium wins on language breadth, browser coverage including Safari, and existing suites you already have.
Selenium: Is Selenium still relevant?
Yes. Its WebDriver protocol is a W3C standard implemented by every major browser, and very large existing suites are not rewritten cheaply.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Playwright vs CircleCI
- Playwright vs Insomnia
- Playwright vs BrowserStack
- Playwright vs BugHerd
- Playwright vs Cypress
- Playwright vs GitHub Actions
- Playwright vs Puppeteer
- Playwright vs Vitest
- Playwright vs Zephyr Scale
- Selenium vs CircleCI
- Selenium vs Insomnia
- Selenium vs BrowserStack
- Selenium vs BugHerd
- Selenium vs Cypress
- Selenium vs GitHub Actions
- Selenium vs Puppeteer
- Selenium vs Vitest
- Selenium vs Zephyr Scale