Skip to content
effecthub

BrowseGPT vs Browser Use

Two fact sheets from our own research, side by side — pricing, platforms, API access and status re-checked by us rather than quoted from the vendors.

The short answer

Free plan
Both — BrowseGPT is free to use, Browser Use has a free plan
Public API
Browser Use has one; not confirmed by us for BrowseGPT
Higher Trust score
Browser Use — 78 vs 71 for BrowseGPT
Best fit
BrowseGPT: Seeing how an LLM decomposes a web task into concrete actions · Browser Use: Running web automation without maintaining your own browser infrastructure
Platforms
BrowseGPT: Chrome extension · Browser Use: Web

From our own records as of each tool's last check. Anything we have not confirmed is left out rather than guessed. How we verify

BrowseGPTFree Chrome extension that attempts web tasks by clicking and typing on your behalfBrowser UseManaged cloud browsers driven by AI agents, from a plain-language task or from Python and TypeScript code.

Side by side

FactBrowseGPTBrowser Use
CategoryBrowser Automation AgentsBrowser Automation Agents
Pricing modelFreeFreemium
Public APINot confirmedYes
Trust score71 / 10078 / 100
PlatformsChrome extensionWeb, API
Company—Browser Use
Launched20232024
Last verifiedOct 15, 2026Oct 16, 2026

What our research says

BrowseGPT

A small, honest demonstration of an LLM driving a browser, and the reason-per-step display makes its failures legible rather than mysterious. The catch is that it is a side project: version 2.0 dates from July 2024 and the author openly says it gets stuck and misclicks.

Pros

  • Free and installs in one click from the Chrome Web Store
  • Every action comes with a stated reason you can review
  • Marketing copy is honest about the failure modes

Cons

  • Last store update was July 2024 and ratings average 3.2
  • No support, roadmap or company behind it
  • Modern browser agents are far more capable

Browser Use

The MIT-licensed open-source library made the category legible, and the hosted service is the practical way to run it at scale without babysitting Chromium instances; CDP compatibility means existing Playwright or Puppeteer code points at it with a config change. Billing is now pure pay-as-you-go with no subscription, so light users pay cents while heavy proxy traffic or frontier models add up fast.

Pros

  • MIT-licensed open-source library underneath, so you are not locked into the hosted service
  • CDP-compatible endpoint works with existing Playwright, Puppeteer and Selenium code
  • No subscription: credits from $5 never expire, and new sign-ups get $1 free
  • Concurrency starts at 10 sessions and rises automatically with lifetime spend
  • Models from several providers, or your own key

Cons

  • Real cost depends on browser-minutes, proxy GB and model tokens, with a 20% fee on tokens
  • Residential proxy is on by default at $5/GB, which adds up quickly on media-heavy sites
  • Company founded only in 2024, so its operational track record is short

Which one fits

Choose BrowseGPT if you need

  • Seeing how an LLM decomposes a web task into concrete actions
  • Teaching or demos about browser agents
  • Low-stakes navigation on public pages

Choose Browser Use if you need

  • Running web automation without maintaining your own browser infrastructure
  • Teams already on Playwright, Puppeteer or Selenium via the CDP endpoint
  • Agent workflows needing session persistence, replay and human checkpoints

BrowseGPT vs Browser Use: the questions people ask

Does BrowseGPT or Browser Use have a free tier?

Both: BrowseGPT is free to use, and Browser Use has a free tier.

Which has a public API, BrowseGPT or Browser Use?

Browser Use ships a public API, as of our last verification. A public API for BrowseGPT is not confirmed by us — check its developer docs before you plan an integration.

More comparisons

Browse all Browser Automation Agents →