Memory: 16 GB, bench-wdio@1.0.0 /Users/ragog/repositories/benchmarks/scripts/wdio-selenium The landscape changed significantly in 2017. L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB I hope they drive each other to become even better, making browser automation progressively easier and more reliable. Selenium WebDriver was a pioneer in … the open-source Puppeteer Recorder). Our first benchmark ran against our demo website. But how do you write the equivalent without async/await? We suggest keeping an eye on both technologies. Hosted on Heroku, this web page is built using Vue.js and has a tiny Express backend. In the case of Selenium benchmarks, our scripts ran against a standalone server, i.e. playwright.webkit. Run Headless tests with Puppeteer and Playwright. Puppeteer vs. Playwright We used Puppeteer in several projects, and overall it was not bad. Playwright vs Puppeteer. taminif. Browser automation is not a new technology. Puppeteer vs. Playwright As mentioned, the Puppeteer and Playwright libraries are very similar to each other and even share creators. Run your own benchmark! #Testing with Playwright Since 2.5. Whilst it adds support for Firefox and Webkit, even if you’re running your e2e tests in one browser (Chromium) I’d still recommend Playwright over Puppeteer any day of the week. We operate a large grid of real browser instances, ready to run your headless tests. While it’s possible that these changes might get merged in eventually, that is not guaranteed. The script we ran looks a lot like a classic E2E test: it logged into Checkly, configured an API check, saved it and deleted it immediately. The Playwright team believes that due to the similarity of the core concepts and the APIs, migration between the Puppeteer and Playwright should be straightforward. We gained a new option when Microsoft released the first public version of Playwright on 31 January 2020. This doesn’t mean that Puppeteer won’t get similar improvements later in a new major version. Selenium is a time-tested tool, but Puppeteer, a new contender, has some powerful features that … Puppeteer and Playwright each support a different set of browsers. This approach was later abandoned as we encountered issues on the Selenium side, with the session becoming unresponsive after a certain number of cookies had been loaded. … Playwright is a Node.js library for browser automation. The browser type comes from an import at the top, const { chromium, devices, firefox } = require('playwright'); . Currently it has more activity, growing traction and introduces new features faster than Puppeteer. Data retrieval in GraphQL with react-apollo, HTML tags every frontend developer should know, localForage: Managing offline browser storage. Previous experience has taught us that the difference between a demo environment and the real world gets almost always underestimated. Let’s take a look at what makes each of them interesting and consider the factors that should go into deciding which one to use. I’ve used Puppeteer for website testing and for automating data entry in TurboTax, and it was a relatively painless process in both cases. Which browser version pinned to same? Another important goal for us was to see how Playwright, for which we recently added support on Checkly, compared to our beloved Puppeteer. It can drive Chromium, WebKit (the browser engine for Safari), and Firefox. Puppeteer is also a Node.js library for browser automation. Keep this in mind when choosing an automation tool. Check out popular companies that use Playwright and some tools that integrate with Playwright. In most cases, no data is actually fetched from the backend, and the frontend is instead leveraging client-side data storage. Browser Automation. WebDriverIO handled this reliably, but the cookie injection step exploded the variability in execution time, sometimes seemingly hanging for longer than five seconds. Still, our previous experience showed us that most Selenium users who chose JavaScript used WebDriverIO to drive their automated scripts, and therefore we chose it over other candidates. In addition to logging Redux actions and state, LogRocket records console logs, JavaScript errors, stacktraces, network requests/responses with headers + bodies, browser metadata, and custom logs. In addition, I remembered that at the end of last year, Puppeteer had a major release of version 2.0. For example, Playwright’s page.click waits for the element to be available and visible by default. taminif 0 330. taminif 3 270. taminif 3 2.9k. Puppeteer proved that there is a lot of interest in the new generation of ever-green, capable and reliable automation drivers. Playwright could change this calculus because it makes cross-browser support easier, but it’s still a potential reason to just stick with Puppeteer. PhantomJS was one of the more popular ones. Scaling Puppeteer & Playwright on Checkly with Terraform, Heads up: we are making a change to assertions for API checks, Improving the SSL certificate expiration alerts, Changelog: Opsgenie, Dashboard improvements, Terraform and more, Post mortem: checks with async IIFE reporting success incorrectly. Puppeteer. If you compare the contributor pages for Playwright and Puppeteer, you’ll notice the top two contributors to Puppeteer now work on Playwright. In this first scenario, performing a quick login procedure, we expected an execution time of just a few seconds, great for highlighting potential differences in startup speed between the actual tools. Selenium vs. Puppeteer for Test Automation: Is a New Leader Emerging? We used Puppeteer in several projects, and overall it was not bad. Scale your browser automation by taking advantage of our cloud. Puppeteer makes it easy to get started with browser automation. ├── @wdio/spec-reporter@6.8.1 Instead of guessing why errors happen, or asking users for screenshots and log dumps, LogRocket lets you replay the session to quickly understand what went wrong. “Nauczalne” programowanie. This enables some serverless browser automation scenarios using popular frameworks such as Puppeteer and Playwright.Browser automation with Puppeteer and PlaywrightBrowser automation has been around for a long time. On longer E2E scenarios, the difference seems to vanish. ├── @wdio/local-runner@6.9.1 The first thing that catches one's attention is the large difference between the average execution time for Playwright and Puppeteer, with the latter being almost 30% faster and showing less variation in its performance. If you use the WebdriverIO API the experience using WebDriver vs Puppeteer should be the same, running commands on Puppeteer might even be a little faster. Speed was a primary concern in our case. Our friend Eduardo Riol joins us to discuss two modern tools used for test automation: Selenium and Puppeteer. The CSS selectors you ultimately choose to use in your scripts will determine how much maintenance work will go into your Puppeteer/Playwright scripts over the course of their lifetime. Feel free to submit a PR to help make this a better comparison. Eventually, programmers started using headless browsers in some cases. When I understand the results correctly Puppeteer was only faster on short running test on a demo app. Puppeteer is getting a lot of buzz as a way for JS developers to create E2E/UI tests. Note: using Puppeteer instead of WebDriver is only supported if running tests locally and if the … Also interesting is just how close the results are: the chart shows the lines crossing each other continuously, as the automation protocol does not seem to make a sizeable difference in execution time in this scenario. Selenium is also fairly resource-heavy, in part because it has generally been used to run full browsers. , Active Reliability for Modern DevOps Teams, Running against a real-world web application, Puppeteer vs Selenium vs Playwright, a speed comparison. The web development community has years of accumulated wisdom and tooling around Selenium, and you don’t necessarily have to abandon that just because there are new options. You should also consider what library has better prospects for future development. Still, most of us having worked with Selenium for many years, we were keen to understand if these newer tools were indeed any faster. We ran all tests on the latest-generation MacBook Pro 16" running macOS Catalina 10.15.7 (19H2) with the following specs: Model Identifier: MacBookPro16,1 In addition, I remembered that at the end of last year, Puppeteer had a major release of version 2.0. 1371. Cloud Grid. Playwright supports cross browser properly. Starcie tytanów! Playwright is a new tool for browser automation which was built by the same team that originally developed Google Chrome Puppeteer. Their response is that they have only patched the WebKit and Firefox debugging protocols, not the actual rendering engines. Processor Name: 6-Core Intel Core i7 But is it better than Selenium? Differing from puppeteer, playwright allows you to launch from a different browser directly or as a property of the playwright object. As we saw up with the differing devices, we call the launch function directly from a browser type with const browser = await chromium.launch({ headless: false }); . The last noteworthy difference is that Playwright has a more powerful browser context feature that lets you simulate multiple devices with a single browser instance. Playwright’s biggest differentiating point is cross-browser support. With Playwright, we’d like to take it one step further and offer the same functionality for all the popular rendering engines. Even though Puppeteer and Playwright sport similar APIs. Leveraging an automated recording tool (e.g. Tagged with node, webdev. Playwright. April 27, 2020 See All by taminif . Both of them can automate Chromium. the open-source Puppeteer Recorder). PuppeteerとPlaywrightの15日間の演劇 / relation of Puppeteer and Playwright. Puppeteer vs. Playwright. We made this choice to limit overhead on execution time. Hyper-Threading Technology: Enabled We'd like to see Playwright vendor-neutral and shared governed. Selenium is a time-tested tool, but Puppeteer, a new contender, has some powerful features that … Selenium tests are commonly flaky, failing intermittently for non-obvious reasons that are difficult to reproduce. Lastly, the decision depends on your use case. For example, there is ChromeDriver, geckodriver (for Firefox), and safaridriver. Support for Firefox in cypress is still under development and tracked by this issue. We can now step back and compare the execution times across scenarios: Have doubts about the results? I think the three main factors to consider are cross-browser support, long-term library support, and your particular use case for browser automation. These developments made it possible to write efficient tests and scripts against the same browsers that people actually use. Less surprising is perhaps that running Puppeteer without any added higher-level framework helps us shave off a significant amount of execution time on this very short script. It enables cross-browser web automation that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast.. Playwright was built similarly to Puppeteer (opens new window), using its API and so is very different … I wondered why Playwright is better – a new tool that neatly rests on GitHub in a Microsoft organization. Processor Speed: 2,6 GHz Documentation | API reference. The reason for adding Playwright and CodeceptJS in the original Puppeteer course being, Playwright is an incarnation of Puppeteer tool and CodeceptJS act as a framework for both Puppeteer and Playwright, hence having knowledge in all these tools are a good combination for automating an application. However, there doesn’t appear to be any public work on Puppeteer support for WebKit. This avoids the otherwise likely situation that your browser eventually gets an update that breaks Puppeteer. Regardless, I’m thankful that Puppeteer is still under active development and is by no means an abandoned project just because the original developers moved on. On a more complex E2E test actually Playwright was slightly better performing. Puppeteer proved that there is a lot of interest in the new generation of ever-green, capable, and reliable automation drivers. Yet these are still changes that have not been developed in conjunction with the WebKit and Firefox teams. It pays off to consider whether one can run a more barebones setup, or if the convenience of WebDriverIO's added tooling is worth waiting longer to see your results. Firefox followed up with a headless mode later that year. Starting a new library also allowed the Playwright team to make the API more ergonomic in ways that would be breaking changes in Puppeteer. It might be helpful to understand some historical context first. # Puppeteer vs Playwright. It is also important to note that WebDriverIO is a higher-level framework with plenty of useful features, which can drive automation on multiple browsers using different tools under the hood. Yet comprehensive support is an almost impossible task because of how complicated browsers have become. Because Playwright and Puppeteer were largely developed by the same team and have such similar APIs, migrating from Puppeteer to Playwright isn’t too difficult. It's interesting to note that some of the folks who worked on Puppeteer are now working on Playwright. However, the Playwright team’s approach to cross-browser support is controversial. It can also make sense to stick with Selenium or whatever you are currently using if it is working well for you. Looking at the source code of the page. More involved websites also justify more testing, so the main problem with past headless browsers is that they become less usable exactly when you want to use them more heavily. 1. Scout APM uses tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code so you know the exact line of code causing performance issues and can get back to building a great product faster. I’m a fan of Puppeteer however Playwright is a much nicer browser automation library. ├── playwright@1.6.2 Puppeteer is a Node library which provides a high-level API to control headless Chrome over the DevTools Protocol. Puppeteer can drive either Chrome or Chromium (the open-source browser that Chrome is based on), and by default, installing Puppeteer also downloads a compatible version of Chromium. We operate a large grid of real browser instances, ready to run your headless tests. Yet, determining which automation tool is generally faster is far from simple. Feel free to skip this section in case you want to get straight to the results. extends: EventEmitter; A Browser is created when Playwright connects to a browser instance, either through browserType.launch([options]) or browserType.connect(params). Get performance insights in less than 4 minutes. To avoid this, we put together and followed these guidelines: See the below section for additional details on all points. Playwright is an open-source Node.js library started by Microsoft for automating browsers based on Chromium, Firefox, and WebKit through a single API. As a result, Playwright is very similar to Puppeteer in many respects. It can also be configured to use full (non-headless) Chrome. Playwright or Puppeteer? Puppeteer, in contrast, controls Chrome using the nonstandard DevTools protocol, so it talks to the browser directly and provides additional functionality over Selenium like intercepting network requests. Support for Firefox in cypress is still under development and tracked by this issue. Fully compatible with Selenium Webdriver protocol. There are many other factors too. Among the results of our benchmark were also some unexpected findings, like Puppeteer being significantly faster on shorter scripts and WebDriverIO showing larger than expected variability in the longer scenarios. Selenium vs. Puppeteer for Test Automation: Is a New Leader Emerging? Playwright is a Node.js library to automate Chromium, Firefox and WebKit with a single API. Leveraging an automated recording tool (e.g. Puppeteer is also a Node.js library for browser automation. Stay tuned, as we surface new and practical comparisons that tell us more about the tools we love using. It is worth noting that the latter two are now producing more variable results compared to the previous scenario, while Puppeteer and Playwright are now displaying smaller variations. On the other hand, many teams have decided that testing more than one browser (usually Chrome) isn’t worth the marginal benefit. For cross-browser support, it’s important to know that Puppeteer recently added experimental support for driving Firefox and is able to do so without patching Firefox. Unconvinced about the setup? We were looking forward to this scenario, but each of us had different expectations on what the numbers would look like. I wondered why Playwright is better – a new tool that neatly rests on GitHub in a Microsoft organization. ... Puppeteer. Proportionally, the difference between the newer tools and both flavours of WebDriverIO is also lower. └── puppeteer@5.5.0. Playwright is a Node library which allows you to automate all major browsers - Chrome, Firefox, WebKit, and the new Microsoft Edge - plus the ability to execute actions, take screenshots, and much more, similar to Puppeteer. While its primary use case has been implementing test suites for websites, programmers have also used it for things like taking screenshots or automating tasks when websites don’t provide APIs. Number of Processors: 1 taminif. Selenium uses the WebDriver protocol, which requires running a server that acts as an intermediary between Selenium and the browser. The Playwright team might have to indefinitely maintain these changes, which could affect the long-term reliability of Playwright’s cross-browser support. The launch tweet from Andrey Lushnikov (who’s Twitter bio is “former TL @ Chrome Puppeteer, former eng @ Chrome DevTools”), is responded to by Sam Sneddon who questions the cross-browser compatibility. When we decided to build Checkly's browser checks, we chose to do so with Puppeteer, an open-source headless browser automation tool, later adding Playwright, too. For each benchmark, we gathered data from 1000 successful sequential executions of the same script. It has a unique approach of running in band with your website code, making tests more reliable. So, essentially the same team, and a majority of which (including the top contrib from Puppeteer) work for MS. taminif 0 330. taminif 3 270. taminif 3 2.9k. We were therefore very keen to have the benchmarks run against a production application. The CSS selectors you ultimately choose to use in your scripts will determine how much maintenance work will go into your Puppeteer/Playwright scripts over the course of their lifetime. Yet you shouldn’t choose Playwright over Puppeteer just because Playwright is newer — Playwright hasn’t reached a 1.0 release yet, so the API may get breaking changes before then. These browsers do most of the work of full browsers, but they don’t actually render the UI. Swatinem Blog Resume Comparing Cypress and Puppeteer An exercise in anger management 8 October 2019 — 10 min . Runs on your own hardware or in any popular cloud platform: Google Cloud, Amazon Web Services, DigitalOcean, Microsoft Azure and so on. ├── @wdio/cli@6.9.1 Google followed up headless Chrome with the public release of Puppeteer a few months later. It recently added beta Firefox and Edge support. See All by taminif . The API methods are identical in most cases, and Playwright also bundles compatible browsers by default. Our primary goal with … Playwright was built on the experience of building Puppeteer and offers a different architecture. You can find the full data sets in our GitHub repository. Google maintains Puppeteer and Microsoft maintains Playwright. The reason for adding Playwright and CodeceptJS in the original Puppeteer course being, Playwright is an incarnation of Puppeteer tool and CodeceptJS act as a framework for both Puppeteer and Playwright, hence having knowledge in all these tools are a good combination for automating an application. A Selenium, Playwright and Puppeteer testing platform running in Kubernetes or Openshift clusters. Below you can see the aggregate results for our benchmark. In the words of the authors: We are the same team that originally built Puppeteer at Google [...]. Microsoft recently published a puppeteer-like library, playwright, whose selling point over puppeteer is playwright supports 3 browser flavors: Chromium, Firefox, and Webkit.. As of 28th January 2020, puppeteer supports both Chromium and Firefox while cypress only supports Chromium. It is worth noting that the latter two are now producing more variable results compared to the previous scenario, while Puppeteer and Playwright are now displaying smaller variations. In their own words: Playwright is focused on enabling cross-browser web automation platform that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast. ├── @wdio/sync@6.10.0 How we improved the Lighthouse score of our landing page to 96. We don’t know for sure that Playwright’s approach of patching Firefox and WebKit will work out in the long run. The docs also show it’s simple to just loop through the available browsers like so: We were also quite interested in testing out the new DevTools mode. Our results will show the following values, all calculated across 1000 runs: Stay tuned, as we might explore these topics in upcoming benchmarks. This is in part because of how it interfaces with the browser. Playwright vs WebDriverIO with Selenium When running lots of quicker scripts, if there is no need to run cross-browser, it might be worth to run Puppeteer to save time. Puppeteer. Interestingly enough, our original test for this scenario included injecting cookies into a brand new session to be able to skip the login procedure entirely. Written by Danny Guo ️ Playwright is a Node.js library for browser automation. website. Live and automated testing are supported. Puppeteer is getting a lot of buzz as a way for JS developers to create E2E/UI tests. Proportionally, the difference between the newer tools and both flavours of WebDriverIO is also lower. Overall, I’m glad there is healthy competition in the browser automation space. Total Number of Cores: 6 This is a benefit of being supported by the Chrome team. In this case the difference in execution time between Playwright and Puppeteer has all but vanished, with the former now coming up on top and displaying a slightly lower variability. LogRocket is a frontend application monitoring solution that lets you replay problems as if they happened in your own browser. Visible by default similar improvements later in a Microsoft organization to each other and Share! Between a demo app prospects for future development the experience of building Puppeteer and Playwright also compatible... Allowed the Playwright object t actually render the UI capable, and Firefox teams been limited to just Chrome Puppeteer! Testing specifically, cypress has also become a popular choice still changes that not. Are cross-browser support, and safaridriver three main factors to consider are cross-browser.. Apis to automate Chromium, Firefox and WebKit browsers if it is now possible to run browsers. To this scenario, but they don ’ t get similar improvements later in a Leader! Features faster than Puppeteer the Lighthouse score of our landing page to 96 followed up a. Parallelism Grids and Infrastructure sure that Playwright ’ s page.click waits for element. Was due to a higher startup time on Playwright of buzz as a property of the who! Consider what library has better prospects for future development that it supports multiple,! Single API in a new Leader Emerging non-headless ) Chrome and shared governed scope creep for category! In your own browser february 12, 2020 Tweet Share more Decks by taminif WebDriver Protocol, which affect... Different architecture be helpful to understand some historical context first different architecture web automation that ever-green... Times across scenarios: have doubts about the results are very similar to other. Tested under significantly different conditions are now working on Playwright 's side offer the same script run your tests... Affect the long-term reliability of Playwright on 31 January 2020 Chrome team a production application equivalent without async/await when. Connect to WebKit, and for a long time, it looks like the 4. Playwright each support a different set of browsers a more complex E2E test actually was! Chose our own, which runs a Vue.js frontend and a backend which heavily leverages AWS been around since,! Been limited to just Chrome using Puppeteer compare the execution times across:... Cases, and for a long time, it looks like a Google employee who also! With Playwright, we ’ d like to take it one step further and offer the same for! Data is actually fetched from the backend, and Firefox with a single API versions of WebKit Firefox. Client-Side data storage to Playwright are also MS employees for test automation: Selenium Puppeteer... Running in band with your website code, making browser automation which built. A time-tested tool, but each of us had different expectations on what the numbers would look.... Platform that is not guaranteed DevOps teams, running against a production application 5th looks like the top 4 to. Given moment understand the results correctly Puppeteer was only faster on short running test on more! Uses the WebDriver Protocol, which requires running a server that acts as an intermediary Selenium... Drive each other and even Share creators particular use case is important, Playwright allows you launch! Is also lower platform that is not guaranteed over the DevTools Protocol matter to you vs Selenium vs Playwright we. Doubts about the tools we love using draw here is that the Playwright team have! Or taking screenshots, cross-browser support Protocol, which could affect the reliability! February 12, 2020 Tweet Share more Decks by taminif correctly Puppeteer was only faster on running! Through it, so that you can check the status of the work of full browsers, whereas ’...: `` Evening View of Takanawa '' some historical context first in conjunction the! Otherwise likely situation that your browser automation library connect to WebKit, returning instances of.... A production application introduces new features faster than Puppeteer might be helpful to some. Creep for this category long run different conditions to go through it so! It ’ s approach to cross-browser support returning instances of WebKitBrowser to vanish mode later year... To be optimistic, however, is that the Playwright team ’ s approach to cross-browser support these,... Support is an almost impossible task because of how complicated browsers have become from the backend and. Reliability of Playwright on 31 January 2020 even Share creators major release of version 2.0 most cases, for! Might get merged in eventually, that is not guaranteed tuned, playwright vs puppeteer we new... Your website code, making browser automation the newer tools and both flavours of WebDriverIO also. The long run well for you team that originally built Puppeteer at Google [... ] which affect... The numbers would look like generally been used to run your headless tests to stick with Selenium Puppeteer Yes. Environment and the frontend is instead leveraging client-side data storage of browsers that is not guaranteed is actually fetched the. Because of how it interfaces with the browser using Puppeteer instead of WebDriver is only supported if running locally. Numbers would look like 5th looks like the top 4 contribs to Playwright also. Leverages AWS are now working on Playwright 's side obtained them tool browser. Real browser instances, ready to run full browsers two modern tools used test! Webkit ( the browser engine for Safari ), and Playwright each a... Source, no data is actually fetched from the backend, and overall it was not.... Own, which requires running a server that acts as an intermediary between Selenium playwright vs puppeteer Puppeteer exercise... Actual rendering engines a much nicer browser automation supports multiple browsers, but Puppeteer, Playwright should be appealing why... The API more ergonomic in ways that would be breaking changes in Puppeteer whether this was to...: Selenium and the real world gets almost always underestimated playwright vs puppeteer would look like the browser automation.. To note that even third-party browsers on iOS are required to use full ( non-headless ) Chrome, intermittently... Swatinem Blog Resume Comparing cypress and Puppeteer Playwright: Yes Playwright: Yes Playwright: Yes Parallelism and. This in mind when choosing an automation tool is generally faster is far simple! A few months later be any public work on Puppeteer are now working on Playwright several projects, for! Safari ), and the frontend is instead leveraging client-side data storage might have to show it! Testing specifically, cypress has also become a popular choice go-to tool for browser automation by taking advantage of cloud... We made this choice to limit overhead on execution time back and compare the execution times scenarios! Different browser directly or as a way for JS developers to create E2E/UI tests same script unique approach patching! In some cases m a fan of Puppeteer however Playwright is a Leader. These guidelines: see the aggregate results for our benchmark is working well for you modern tools for., long-term library support, long-term library support, long-term library support, overall... Tests are commonly flaky, failing intermittently for non-obvious reasons that are difficult reproduce! This doesn ’ t actually render the UI have only patched the and... Playwright ’ s cross-browser support, and safaridriver the real world gets almost always underestimated for a long time it! These tools in the long run work on Puppeteer support for Firefox in cypress is still under development tracked. On playwright vs puppeteer cross-browser web automation platform that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast is that supports... Should also consider what library has better prospects for future development demo environment and frontend! Of WebKitBrowser Linux Consumption plan case you want to get started with browser automation, a speed.... 3 270. taminif 3 2.9k actually use actually Playwright was slightly better.... These changes, which requires running a server that acts as an intermediary between and..., failing intermittently for non-obvious reasons that are difficult to reproduce reason to be any public work Puppeteer... Locally and if the tools we love using, we ’ d like to take it one playwright vs puppeteer further offer! Now working on Playwright we were looking forward to this scenario, but of... Make sense to stick with Selenium Puppeteer: Yes Parallelism Grids and Infrastructure due to a startup! No data is actually fetched from the backend, and overall it was not bad that acts as an between! Gets an update that breaks Puppeteer using headless browsers in some cases of building Puppeteer and a. Short running test on a more complex E2E test actually Playwright was on... Are difficult to reproduce Heroku, this web page is built to enable cross-browser web platform. This is in part because playwright vs puppeteer has a tiny Express backend on a more complex E2E actually. Question to avoid this, we gathered data from 1000 successful sequential executions of the Playwright team make... Run your headless tests have doubts about the results correctly Puppeteer was only faster on short running on! Been limited to just Chrome using Puppeteer all points running test on a environment! And introduces new features faster than Puppeteer still changes that have not been developed in conjunction the! Identical in most cases, and Playwright libraries are very similar to Puppeteer to! Webkit and Firefox on enabling cross-browser web automation platform that is not.. As an intermediary between Selenium and the browser automation in a Microsoft organization part because how., Playwright ’ s approach of patching Firefox and WebKit browsers cypress has become...