Ranking on the monorepo workload
| Rank | Configuration | Type | Median time | p95 time | vs GitHub-hosted | Mean cost per job |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vitko Runners (warm starts + test splitting)Vitko | Managed | 172 s | 191 s | 2.2x faster | $0.0056 |
| 2 | Blacksmith | Managed | 177 s | 291 s | 2.2x faster | $0.014 |
| 3 | Vitko RunnersVitko | Managed | 180 s | 211 s | 2.1x faster | $0.0058 |
| 4 | GitHub-hosted larger runner (4 vCPU) | Managed | 220 s | 235 s | 1.7x faster | $0.046 |
| 5 | Ubicloud | Managed | 276 s | 366 s | 1.4x faster | $0.0061 |
| 6 | Self-hosted runners on Google Cloud | Self-hosted | 278 s | 297 s | 1.4x faster | $0.016 |
| 7 | Self-hosted runners on AWS (one VM per job) | Self-hosted | 281 s | 342 s | 1.4x faster | $0.012 |
| 8 | RunsOn | Self-hosted | 288 s | 313 s | 1.3x faster | $0.0039 |
| 9 | GitHub-hosted runners (ubuntu-latest, 2 vCPU) | Managed | 384 s | 401 s | baseline | $0.040 |
The job is the project's own Build Examples workflow at a pinned release commit, with the portability edits listed on the workload page. Results on your monorepo depend on its size, cache use and parallelism: measure yours with the same method.
Head to head: Vitko Runners vs Blacksmith · Vitko Runners vs Ubicloud · Vitko Runners vs RunsOn · Vitko Runners vs Self-hosted runners on AWS · Vitko Runners vs Self-hosted runners on Google Cloud · Vitko Runners vs GitHub-hosted larger runner (4 vCPU) · Vitko Runners vs GitHub-hosted (ubuntu-latest) · Blacksmith vs GitHub-hosted (ubuntu-latest).
More: speed ranking · cost ranking · alternatives to GitHub-hosted · monorepo workload · self-hosted vs managed · list prices · free minutes · alternatives to Blacksmith, RunsOn, Ubicloud.
Maintained by Vitko, Inc., which sells one of the products measured. Measured October 7 to 11, 2026 (result set v1); page generated October 27, 2026. Every number comes from results.json; the workflows and every raw job record are in the repository, and the method says how the runs were made.