Agentic AI Comparison:
Browser-Use vs Nova Act
vs
Introduction
This report provides a detailed comparison of Amazon's Nova Act and the Browser-Use AI agent across five metrics: autonomy, ease of use, flexibility, cost, and popularity.
Overview
Nova Act
Nova Act, developed by Amazon, is an AI agent designed specifically for automating browser-based tasks. It uses a modular SDK to enable developers to create reliable workflows for managing complex tasks with precision, outperforming other agents in certain benchmarks while maintaining a cost-efficient approach.
Browser-Use
Browser-Use is an open-source AI framework for browser automation. It provides extensive support for multiple LLMs and persistent browser states, along with flexible configurations for user-friendly integration in diverse workflows. Browser-Use is widely known for its community-driven development model and robust error-handling features.
Metrics Comparison
autonomy
Browser-Use: 8
Browser-Use offers excellent autonomy with features like persistent browser sessions and error recovery capabilities. However, its reliance on user configuration for custom workflows may limit absolute independence in some cases.
Nova Act: 8.5
Nova Act demonstrates high autonomy by successfully automating multi-step browser tasks such as form completion and scheduling, with high reliability on internal benchmarks like ScreenSpot Web Text (94%). However, it still requires some human intervention for certain scenarios.
While both agents excel in autonomy, Nova Act's tighter focus on usability and advanced task automation slightly edges out Browser-Use.
ease of use
Browser-Use: 9
Browser-Use is built for ease of use, offering a clean WebUI and support for Docker-based deployment. It allows intuitive control over browser tasks, making it accessible for both developers and technical users.
Nova Act: 8
Nova Act provides a straightforward SDK for developers, enabling easy task automation. However, being in research preview, it may present limitations to non-technical users.
Browser-Use leads in ease of use due to its user-friendly interface and simplified setup process, appealing to a broader user base compared to Nova Act's developer-oriented approach.
flexibility
Browser-Use: 9.5
Browser-Use supports multiple LLM integrations and allows for extensive customizations such as multi-tab management and dynamic error handling, making it highly versatile.
Nova Act: 7.5
Nova Act provides flexibility through its ability to interleave Python code and alternate browser interactions like API calls or Playwright commands, but it is narrowly tailored for web-based environments.
Browser-Use is more flexible due to its support for various LLMs, customizable workflows, and advanced error-handling mechanisms.
cost
Browser-Use: 7.5
While open-source and free to use, Browser-Use may incur hidden operational costs related to hosting and configuration, depending on the deployment scenario.
Nova Act: 9.5
Amazon's Nova Act is highly cost-effective, being 75% cheaper than many competitors, according to reports, making it an economical choice for developers.
Nova Act outperforms Browser-Use in terms of cost, offering advanced features at a significantly lower price.
popularity
Browser-Use: 8.5
Browser-Use enjoys a strong community presence and frequent contributions, making it the preferred choice for open-source enthusiasts and developers.
Nova Act: 7
Nova Act, being a recent launch in research preview, is gaining traction but currently lacks the widespread recognition of established tools.
Browser-Use currently has more popularity due to its established user base and active community support, while Nova Act's reach remains limited to early adopters.
Conclusions
Both Nova Act and Browser-Use excel in specific areas. Nova Act stands out for its cost efficiency and reliability in automating web-based workflows, making it ideal for budget-conscious developers. Browser-Use, on the other hand, leads in ease of use, flexibility, and popularity, appealing to users seeking a highly customizable and community-driven solution. The choice between the two ultimately depends on the user's priorities, such as budget constraints versus customization needs.