Skip to main content

topic / Checked 2026-10-18

Notte vs Tilion: pricing

What will the same completed work cost? Compare Notte and Tilion using documented pricing behavior and a practical evaluation method.

What will the same completed work cost?

Start with the work that has to finish: executions per month, browser time per execution, concurrent browsers and network traffic. Choose the cheapest eligible plan for that workload. An hourly rate can be lower while the bill is higher because a plan floor, billing minimum or extra service applies.

For 10,000 runs lasting three minutes, browser time is 500 hours before rounding, setup and retries. At Notte's published $0.01 browser-hour rate, that meter is $5. Paid-plan eligibility and any proxy or Function usage still determine the total bill.

Compare the billing contract

Notte: The public usage rates are $0.01 per browser-hour, $0.05 per Function-hour and $10 per GB of managed proxy traffic. Paid plans return their price as usage credits. Price the relevant meters and plan eligibility for the workload.

Tilion: Arena provides an estimated usage rate for its test. The reviewed public homepage does not establish a self-serve production plan, allowances or overage terms. Obtain those terms before quoting a monthly bill.

Sources: notte.cc [1] ↗tilion.com [2] ↗

Compare operational limits

Notte: The public plans list 5, 25 and 100 concurrent browser sessions, with custom limits on Enterprise. Session duration and concurrent capacity are separate plan limits; a larger technical API limit does not override the plan.

Tilion: Arena's observed test concurrency is a test configuration, not an account entitlement. Obtain the production concurrency and session creation limits for your access tier before sizing a fleet.

Sources: notte.cc [1] ↗tilion.com [2] ↗

Compare the execution model

Notte: Functions deploy Python code with a run() entry point. Invoke them over HTTP or with an SDK, inspect run history, and roll back code by redeploying an earlier version as the latest version.

Tilion: Public documentation reviewed for this comparison does not establish a deployable Function or app-action contract. Confirm where your automation code runs and how invocation, versioning and logs work before choosing the execution path.

Sources: docs.notte.cc [1] ↗tilion.com [2] ↗

How to evaluate this choice

A useful cost comparison gives both a usage estimate and the eligible monthly plan. Keep an unsupported workload out of the price ranking even if a rate can be multiplied into an attractive number.

  • Count attempted runs as well as successful runs.
  • Apply the provider's rounding rule to each session before adding usage.
  • Separate browser time, function compute, proxy traffic and identity services.
  • Apply included credits once; do not add the same subscription fee again.
  • Mark an ineligible plan as a capacity mismatch rather than a cheap option.

Requirements side by side

RequirementNotteTilion
Browser controlDocumentedArena integration
Saved browser stateDocumentedNot established
Code executionPython FunctionsNot established
Deployment choiceEnterprise optionsNot established

Sources: docs.notte.cc [1] ↗docs.notte.cc [2] ↗docs.notte.cc [3] ↗docs.notte.cc [4] ↗docs.notte.cc [5] ↗docs.notte.cc [6] ↗tilion.com [7] ↗

Which approach fits?

Choose Notte when your browser workflow needs saved logins, credential fill or scheduled Python code alongside the browser.

Notte tradeoff: A saved profile restores browser state; it does not prove that a website still considers the user signed in. Use Managed Auth when the workflow needs connection readiness before it starts.

Choose Tilion when you can obtain access and test the product directly, with its current API and commercial terms in hand.

Tilion tradeoff: Arena measurements do not establish public availability or feature completeness. Confirm access, API details and plan terms before planning a production migration.

Sources: docs.notte.cc [1] ↗tilion.com [2] ↗

A useful acceptance check

Write a pass/fail result for the real task before running the evaluation. Record the account, configuration and code version next to that result. Repeat failures need an explanation, not an automatically different browser configuration.

Keep comparing

Put the workflow to the test.

Try Notte Read the quickstart ↗