Difference Between Cypress And Playwright Automated Testing
An application’s functioning must be evaluated and analyzed in order for it to provide a top-notch user experience because then only a person would like to visit it again and again. The Cypress and Playwright automated testing frameworks are only two of the numerous tools available for online software testing that may aid in spotting any possible bugs or problems.
The primary aim of this article is to make you understand the benefits and drawbacks of each framework and make a smart choice if you’re not sure which one to use for your development projects. Hopefully, comparing Cypress and Playwright’s features, functionality, and usability will help you decide which one is best for your requirements.
So, let’s get started.
What Is Cypress?
Cypress is an Electron application. It gives your desktop programs the functionality of web browsers. Due to the fact that the library and your code are integrated directly into the browser’s execution loop, you can alter the browser’s default behavior to achieve the desired effects. Besides this, Cypress employs its implementation for this; despite the fact that CDP integration is presently in development, it is not made available through its API.
The Node in Cypress may also be utilized, but, you must keep in mind that a customized injected library is given main control. The CDP implementation of the browser, which is standardized and supported by browser vendors, is given control by Playwright.
Advantages Of Cypress:
Let’s look at some of the advantages that Cypress has to offer.
1. The tool is pretty contemporary.
Therefore, if you need to test applications that are already created for Instance, React, Elm, Angular,etc., this will be the ideal option. One may also do cross-browser tests using Cypress testing. The Cypress website automation tool runs test code inside the browser.
2. Cypress is easy and quick to install.
Cypress is based on Node.js, thus you must implement npm. For the normal installation, every province is already in a region. Additionally, you don’t need any extra servers, drivers, testing engines, or wrappers. Your choices are entirely up to you.
3. Quick test execution is provided by Cypress
Because Cypress automatically waits for DOM additional weights, implementing it is a very quick process with a reaction time of less than 20 MS. You are thus not needed to show any implicit or explicit waiting. The Cypress waits for a variety of things automatically, including DOM components, loading, animation, and more.
What Is Playwright?
Here are some other features of the Playwright framework.
- Engine for mobile rendering on desktops and in the cloud.
- Google Chrome for Android is emulated natively on mobile devices via Mobile Safari.
- Tracing, web-first assertions, as well auto-wait.
- Native keyboard and mouse input.
- Uploading and downloading of files
- Intercepting network traffic to spoof and fake requests from the network.
Advantages Of Playwright
Now, let’s have a quick-look at some of the advantages of Playwright.
- It is a GUI tool for debugging tests is Inspector. Although not as excellent as Cypress’s, steel is still valuable.
- Thorough HTML report that might be helpful for both local runs and CI.
- The ability to automatically create images, videos, and trace files on test failures is fantastic for troubleshooting failed tests, particularly in Trace Viewer.
- Quick operation in headless mode
- Components automatically delaying before doing certain actions.
- Testing for visual regression functions right out of the box (in Cypress you have to use a plugin).
Key similarities between Cypress and Playwright
Let’s look at few instances where both Cypress and Playwright coincide with each other.
- While both the tools give the ability to do tests and interactions in Firefox as well as Chromium browsers, there are notable distinctions between them in terms of browser compatibility. These tools are quite helpful since they include capabilities like stub out requests, capturing screenshots, and testing on various screen sizes.
- Furthermore, let’s say you choose to run your tests devoid of a user interface or want to execute them as part of a continuous integration pipeline. Both frameworks include headless alternatives that will let you accomplish it right from the Terminal in that scenario.
Cypress vs. Playwright
In this section, we will look at some of the key differences between these two frameworks.
- The best option for you will depend on the particular requirements of your application and the degree of flexibility vs. structure you need to conduct your automated tests. Playwright and Cypress testing are two options to consider.
- Although the final aim of these two end-to-end testing platforms is the same, Cypress and Playwright approach the testing process quite differently. When opposed to Playwright, Cypress is seen as more of a “package offering” since it creates a folder structure containing sample files that might help testing teams, while testers still need to work inside the constraints of the test runner framework.
Playwright does not produce files and gives you the option to choose your test runner framework. Playwright supports more browsers than Cypress and offers more freedom in this area.
- Playwright’s promise-based approach has the benefit of being able to handle several browsers and users’ contexts at once, despite the fact that both frameworks have distinct methods for conducting tests. Compared to Cypress, which has to be re-run for every single browser choice, this makes it more adaptable and effective.
- While they both seek to address the same problem, they go about it in different ways. Cypress is more of a “complete package,” and it generates a folder structure and sample files. You are also forced to use the framework’s test runner. However, Playwright creates no files and may be set up to operate with the test runner of your choosing.
- The capability of Playwright to test across numerous pages and domains is one of its most important advantages. as well as creating various user scenarios. If your program uses third-party sign-ins, iFrames, pop-ups,etc., both are highly helpful. Cypress, on the other hand, would need you to develop unique tests to emulate the various user situations and to stub out a lot of the requests in order for them to function.
Which is preferred, Cypress or Playwright?
Read below to know that which tool you must prefer.
- Functionality continues to be the major consideration when picking the best testing framework. It is clear from the Cypress vs. Playwright comparison that Cypress provides considerable assistance thanks to its well written documentation and engaged community. Through the assistance offered, all obstacles and problems are conquered.
- It is crucial to keep in mind that selecting a testing tool for your web application eventually comes down to usability and functionality. If the appropriate testing tool is utilized, the whole testing process may be expedited.
- Cypress is the way to go if you’re new to testing and want installation and use to be as simple as possible. Playwright is the best option, nevertheless, if you are more skilled and wish to test Webkit browsers or your tests often include larger sites and pages
- Cross-browser testing is necessary regardless of the framework for test automation that is used. It is the only method to ensure that the website offers a uniform and smooth user experience regardless of the browser and device being used to view it.
- For end-to-end automated testing of websites and web apps across all major browsers, Playwright Test Runner is utilized. In the case that a test fails, the Playwright test runner supports fixtures, parallel testing, out-of-the-box context isolation, and the capture of videos, photos, and other test artifacts.
With LambdaTest, a continuous testing platform, you can run Playwright tests on more than 50 real browser and operating system combinations. With a few adjustments to your test script and test configuration declarations, you may move your existing Playwright tests to the LambdaTest cloud. You can analyze data in-depth to solve problems rapidly. Finally, when you grow the number of tests you run, you won’t have to worry about creating or maintaining an internal testing infrastructure.
In addition to this, with LambdaTest, you can run test on Cypress cloud on more than 40 different browser versions.
Some Final Words!
The answer to Cypress vs. Playwright is that it depends on your level of testing expertise and the features you consider crucial. Cypress is the ideal option for you if you’re new to testing and prefer a more plug-and-play approach that comes with everything you need to get started. It is simpler to receive assistance and discover solutions to certain conditions you find tough because of its strong documentation and large community.
Playwright, on the other hand, is the ideal option for you if you are more experienced with testing, need to test Webkit browsers, or need to cover scenarios that span several pages and domains in your tests. If you have fallen in love with a certain test runner or don’t need one at all, Playwright is also the best option for you. We can anticipate that the community, documentation, and framework as a whole will continue to develop over time since the framework is still relatively young.