StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Testing Frameworks
  4. Browser Testing
  5. Playwright vs Test Studio

Playwright vs Test Studio

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Test Studio
Test Studio
Stacks2
Followers17
Votes0
GitHub Stars2
Forks11
Playwright
Playwright
Stacks615
Followers586
Votes81
GitHub Stars79.0K
Forks4.8K

Playwright vs Test Studio: What are the differences?

Introduction

Playwright and Test Studio are both popular automation testing tools used for web application testing. While they serve similar purposes, there are key differences that set them apart from each other. In this article, we will explore these differences in detail.

  1. Scripting Language Support: Playwright supports multiple scripting languages including JavaScript, Python, and TypeScript, providing developers with flexibility to write tests in their preferred language. On the other hand, Test Studio primarily focuses on Microsoft-centric technologies and supports scripting in C#.

  2. Browser Support: Playwright supports a wide range of browsers including Chrome, Firefox, and WebKit, making it a versatile tool for cross-browser testing. In comparison, Test Studio primarily focuses on Internet Explorer and Microsoft Edge, restricting its browser compatibility.

  3. Parallel Execution: Playwright allows for parallel execution of tests, enabling faster test execution and reducing the overall testing time. Test Studio, on the other hand, does not provide native support for parallel execution, limiting the scalability and efficiency of test suites.

  4. Cross-Platform Support: Playwright is designed to be cross-platform, making it compatible with Windows, macOS, and Linux operating systems. In contrast, Test Studio is primarily designed for Windows environments, limiting its cross-platform capabilities.

  5. Community and Support: Playwright has gained significant traction and a growing community, which ensures regular updates, bug fixes, and community-driven support. Test Studio, being a commercial tool, offers support through Telerik's support channels but may have limited community-driven resources in comparison.

  6. Pricing and Licensing: Playwright is an open-source tool and does not require any licensing fees, making it a cost-effective choice for automation testing. Test Studio, being a commercial tool, requires a license for usage, potentially adding to the overall cost of implementing automation testing.

Summary

In summary, Playwright and Test Studio differ in terms of scripting language support, browser compatibility, parallel execution capabilities, cross-platform support, community and support, as well as pricing and licensing. These differences should be considered when choosing an automation testing tool based on specific project requirements and preferences.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Test Studio
Test Studio
Playwright
Playwright

It is a Windows-based software testing tool for web and desktop functional testing, software performance testing, load testing and mobile application testing. The tool ships with a plugin for Visual Studio and a standalone app that use the same repositories and file formats.

It is a Node library to automate the Chromium, WebKit and Firefox browsers with a single API. It enables cross-browser web automation that is ever-green, capable, reliable and fast.

Script-less test recording and playback; Cross-browser test execution – Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome and Safari (web browser); Support for HTML, AJAX, Silverlight, WPF and ASP.NET MVC application testing; Element abstraction and reuse.
Node library; Headless supported; Enables cross-browser web automation; Improved automated UI testing
Statistics
GitHub Stars
2
GitHub Stars
79.0K
GitHub Forks
11
GitHub Forks
4.8K
Stacks
2
Stacks
615
Followers
17
Followers
586
Votes
0
Votes
81
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet
Pros
  • 15
    Cross browser
  • 11
    Open source
  • 9
    Test Runner with Playwright/test
  • 7
    Well documented
  • 7
    Promise based
Cons
  • 12
    Less help
  • 3
    Node based
  • 2
    Does not execute outside of browser
Integrations
Testrail
Testrail
FogBugz
FogBugz
Bugsnag
Bugsnag
Sentry
Sentry
Jira
Jira
TestFairy
TestFairy
Instabug
Instabug
HipTest
HipTest
No integrations available

What are some alternatives to Test Studio, Playwright?

BrowserStack

BrowserStack

BrowserStack is the leading test platform built for developers & QAs to expand test coverage, scale & optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability.

Selenium

Selenium

Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well.

Sauce Labs

Sauce Labs

Cloud-based automated testing platform enables developers and QEs to perform functional, JavaScript unit, and manual tests with Selenium or Appium on web and mobile apps. Videos and screenshots for easy debugging. Secure and CI-ready.

LambdaTest

LambdaTest

LambdaTest platform provides secure, scalable and insightful test orchestration for website, and mobile app testing. Customers at different points in their DevOps lifecycle can leverage Automation and/or Manual testing on LambdaTest.

Karma

Karma

Karma is not a testing framework, nor an assertion library. Karma just launches a HTTP server, and generates the test runner HTML file you probably already know from your favourite testing framework. So for testing purposes you can use pretty much anything you like.

Robot Framework

Robot Framework

It is a generic test automation framework for acceptance testing and acceptance test-driven development. It has easy-to-use tabular test data syntax and it utilizes the keyword-driven testing approach. Its testing capabilities can be extended by test libraries implemented either with Python or Java, and users can create new higher-level keywords from existing ones using the same syntax that is used for creating test cases.

Karate DSL

Karate DSL

Combines API test-automation, mocks and performance-testing into a single, unified framework. The BDD syntax popularized by Cucumber is language-neutral, and easy for even non-programmers. Besides powerful JSON & XML assertions, you can run tests in parallel for speed - which is critical for HTTP API testing.

Rainforest QA

Rainforest QA

Rainforest gives you the reliability of a QA team and the speed of automation, without the hassle of managing a team or the pain of writing automated tests.

WebdriverIO

WebdriverIO

WebdriverIO lets you control a browser or a mobile application with just a few lines of code. Your test code will look simple, concise and easy to read.

Cucumber

Cucumber

Cucumber is a tool that supports Behaviour-Driven Development (BDD) - a software development process that aims to enhance software quality and reduce maintenance costs.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana