Playwright vs Cypress in 2025: A Real-World Comparison

The Context

At EPAM Systems, I worked with both Playwright and Cypress across different projects:

• Project A (E-commerce platform): Cypress → Playwright migration
• Project B (SaaS dashboard): Started with Playwright
• Project C (Marketing website): Pure Cypress

After 2+ years and 10,000+ tests written across both tools, here's what I learned.

---

TL;DR: Which Should You Choose?

My recommendation: Playwright for most enterprise projects in 2025, Cypress for frontend-heavy teams prioritizing developer experience.

---

Performance: Playwright Wins

Execution Speed

Playwright is consistently 30-40% faster in our tests.

Our benchmark (same 500-test suite):

Why Playwright is faster:

1. Native browser automation (no proxy layer)
2. Better parallelization (built-in sharding)
3. Faster auto-waiting mechanism

Example: Login flow execution

• Playwright: 1.2 seconds
• Cypress: 1.8 seconds

The difference compounds across hundreds of tests.

---

Parallel Execution

Playwright: Built-in, easy

Cypress: Requires paid plan or custom setup

Winner: Playwright (parallel execution is free and built-in)

---

Developer Experience: Cypress Has the Edge

Debugging: Cypress Time Travel is Magic

Cypress's interactive Test Runner with Time Travel debugging is unmatched.

What is Time Travel?

• Every command is a snapshot
• Click any command to see DOM state at that moment
• Hover elements to highlight them in the app
• See all network requests, console logs, and storage changes

Example workflow:

1. Run test in Cypress UI
2. Test fails on assertion
3. Click the failing command
4. DOM rewinds to that exact moment
5. Inspect elements, check network tab, console
6. Fix issue and re-run instantly

Playwright alternative: Trace Viewer (close, but not quite the same)

Playwright's traces are detailed (network, screenshots, logs) but not live—you analyze after the fact.

Winner: Cypress (Time Travel is a killer feature for debugging)

---

API for Writing Tests

Both use similar fluent APIs:

Playwright:

Cypress:

Key difference:

• Playwright uses async/await (standard JavaScript)
• Cypress uses command chaining (auto-queues commands)

Winner: Tie (preference-based)

---

Browser Support: Playwright Dominates

Playwright: Chrome, Firefox, Safari (WebKit), Edge

One command runs tests across all browsers:

Cypress: Chrome, Edge, Firefox (limited), Electron

Firefox support is experimental and has issues with complex apps. No Safari support.

Winner: Playwright (real cross-browser testing)

---

Multi-Tab/Window Support

Playwright: Full support

Cypress: No native support

You can test windows opened in the same origin via workarounds, but true multi-tab testing isn't supported.

Winner: Playwright (essential for complex flows like OAuth)

---

Network Interception & Mocking

Both tools support network mocking, but with different approaches.

Playwright: route() API

Cypress: intercept()

Winner: Tie (both are excellent)

---

API Testing: Playwright Pulls Ahead

Playwright has a built-in API testing context:

Cypress: Requires cy.request() (less ergonomic)

Winner: Playwright (first-class API testing support)

---

Real-World Gotchas

Playwright Challenges

1. Steeper learning curve for frontend devs

• Async/await can be confusing if unfamiliar with Promises
• Less "magical" than Cypress (no auto-retry on all assertions)

2. No built-in visual regression testing

• Need third-party tools like Applitools or Percy
• Cypress has better integrations

3. Debugging can be slower

• No live time travel
• Trace viewer requires exporting and opening files

---

Cypress Challenges

1. No multi-tab/window support

• Major limitation for OAuth flows, popups, etc.

2. Limited browser support

• No Safari testing
• Firefox support is experimental

3. Parallel execution requires paid plan

• Cypress Cloud is $75/month for basic plan
• DIY parallelization is complex

4. iframe handling is painful

---

Migration Experience: Cypress → Playwright

We migrated Project A (500 tests) from Cypress to Playwright in 3 weeks.

What Went Well

✅ Performance boost: 25 min → 18 min execution
✅ Cross-browser testing: Caught 12 Firefox-specific bugs
✅ Parallel execution: Free with Playwright (saved $900/year)
✅ API testing: Replaced Newman/Postman with Playwright API tests

What Was Painful

❌ Async/await refactor: Team needed training on Promises
❌ Lost Time Travel debugging: Developers missed Cypress UI
❌ Plugin ecosystem smaller: Some Cypress plugins had no Playwright equivalent

Migration Script (Semi-Automated)

We wrote a script to convert basic Cypress syntax:

Conversion rate: ~70% automated, 30% manual fixes

---

When We Chose Cypress Over Playwright

Project C (marketing website) stuck with Cypress because:

1. Team composition: 90% frontend devs, no QA background
2. Simple app: Single-page React app, Chrome-only users
3. Visual testing: Heavy use of Percy (better Cypress integration)
4. Existing setup: Already had Cypress, no compelling reason to switch

The lesson: Don't migrate for the sake of it. Evaluate your specific needs.

---

Final Verdict

---

My Recommendations

Choose Playwright if:

• Building an enterprise application with QA team
• Need cross-browser testing (especially Safari)
• Have complex auth flows (OAuth, multi-tab, etc.)
• Want free parallel execution
• API testing is part of your strategy

Choose Cypress if:

• Team is primarily frontend developers
• Chrome/Edge testing is sufficient
• Debugging experience is top priority
• Already invested in Cypress ecosystem (plugins, Cloud)
• Building a single-page app with simple flows

Can't Decide?

Start with Playwright. It's the more versatile tool and better positioned for 2025+.

If you hit a specific limitation (e.g., team struggles with async/await), you can always migrate to Cypress.

---

Resources

• Playwright Documentation
• Cypress Documentation
• Playwright vs Cypress - Official Comparison
• My GitHub: Example Playwright Tests

Questions? Let's discuss on LinkedIn.