Avrea vs Ubicloud

Two products with different scope

With Avrea, you keep GitHub Actions and move jobs onto Avrea-managed infrastructure. Caches reuse dependencies and build outputs, resource metrics help explain slow or failed steps, and Quality proposes changes validated against your tests. Avrea runners, observability, Quality.

Ubicloud's managed GitHub runners are also a hosted service. You do not need to lease servers or run its control plane to use them. Separately, its open-source cloud software can be deployed on bare-metal infrastructure to provide services such as virtual machines, networking and storage. Ubicloud overview, build your own cloud.

The prices below compare managed GitHub Actions runners. Ubicloud's general-purpose VM pricing and self-hosted infrastructure costs are outside that comparison.

Features at a glance

Avrea runners and cache storage. Ubicloud runner types, cache and SSH debugging.

Managed runner pricing

Ubicloud has lower Linux x64 minute rates at these matched CPU and memory sizes. Avrea combines runner compute with build-tool caches, CI diagnostics and Quality, which tests proposed fixes.

Avrea is pay as you go with no monthly base fee and 3,000 monthly minutes in 2-vCPU equivalents. Ubicloud gives each account $2.50 in monthly credit, equivalent to 1,250 premium 2-vCPU minutes. Avrea pricing, Ubicloud pricing.

For 10,000 runner minutes at 2 vCPU / 8 GB, compute is $40 on Avrea, $12.50 on Ubicloud standard and $20 on premium before credits and allowances. These totals assume the same runtime on each provider; the benchmarks below show why runtime can differ.

Standard and premium are separate tiers

Ubicloud enables premium runners by default for new users. Jobs fall back to the standard fleet when premium capacity is busy, and billing follows the runner used. The account setting can be switched off to use standard runners. Premium runner settings.

Premium x64 uses AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D processors and has its own per-minute rate. The benchmark tables below identify the tier tested.

Ubicloud runs jobs in Europe by default. Its US fleet can be enabled per account, supports standard runners only and has more limited concurrency. Runner placement.

ARM, macOS and Windows

Avrea's Linux ARM machines use Apple M5 Max hardware. A 2-vCPU / 8-GB Avrea ARM runner is $0.012/min; Ubicloud's 2-vCPU ARM runner is $0.00125/min with 6 GB. Avrea pricing, Ubicloud pricing.

Avrea leads RunsOn's 4-vCPU ARM single-thread comparison at 4,860, versus Ubicloud's 1,311. RunsOn lists 16 GB for both test machines, while Ubicloud's current catalog lists 12 GB for its 4-vCPU ARM runner. These CPU scores show per-core performance, not complete build cost. RunsOn CPU results, Ubicloud specifications.

Avrea also provides macOS and Windows runners. Ubicloud's managed GitHub runner catalog lists Ubuntu, so teams building Apple or Windows applications have a different OS requirement to account for. Avrea runner catalog, Ubicloud runner catalog.

CPU and cache benchmarks

RunsOn's 14 October 2026 dataset covers the same three x64 sizes as the pricing table. Each row below compares matching CPU and memory allocations; higher scores are better.

Avrea leads single-thread at all three sizes and all-core at 2 and 4 vCPU. Ubicloud premium leads all-core at 8 vCPU. Within Ubicloud, standard scores higher than premium on the 2- and 4-vCPU all-core tests, despite premium's higher single-thread scores. RunsOn CPU results.

Ubicloud's lower rates buy more CPU throughput per dollar in these synthetic tests. Cache transfers and the other steps in a workflow also affect completed-job cost.

For the 4-vCPU / 16-GB x64 cache test, Avrea restores the 4-GB file in 14 seconds, compared with 66 seconds on Ubicloud standard and 72 seconds on premium.

These cache transfers use each provider's backend through actions/cache. CPU scores and file transfers measure parts of a build, not complete job times. RunsOn also sells runners, and the results come from small samples. Cache results. Data: RunsOn, CC BY 4.0 and methodology; selected configurations and shortened labels.

Cache capacity and cache reuse

Both services let existing supported Actions cache calls use their own cache backend. Ubicloud's transparent cache also supports setup actions and Docker's type=gha cache. Its standard allowance is 30 GB per repository; enabling premium increases that to 100 GB, shared by premium jobs and any fallback jobs. Ubicloud cache.

Avrea includes 25 GB per repository across regular Actions, package and build-cache entries, with more storage available to purchase. Its package proxies reuse downloaded dependencies, while build-tool caches for Turborepo, Gradle, Bazel and sccache reuse outputs whose inputs are unchanged. Avrea cache, storage, build-cache integrations.

Avrea's persistent disks retain Docker images, layers and builder state between jobs once enabled for the repository. Its BuildKit cache endpoint also lets Docker reuse earlier build outputs. Avrea Docker caching.

Ubicloud offers additional storage in 25-GB increments at $0.04 per GB-month. Both providers evict unused regular cache entries after seven days. Capacity matters when entries are being evicted; cache-hit rates and work skipped determine how much build time that capacity saves.

From a failed job to a tested fix

Avrea's CPU and memory metrics, searchable logs and live-job SSH help trace a failure to the step and resource conditions that caused it. You can inspect the running environment and compare resource use with the job's logs. Avrea observability, debugging.

Avrea Quality uses the failing run, diff and test history to propose a fix. It runs the full test suite and opens a pull request for review when validation passes. The same validation approach applies to proposed dependency and tooling changes.

Ubicloud also supports SSH into running jobs. Add its SSH action to the workflow with your public key to inspect the ephemeral runner while the job is active. Ubicloud SSH.

Choosing between Avrea and Ubicloud

Avrea fits teams whose main constraint is the time spent waiting for CI and resolving failures. It brings runners across Linux, macOS and Windows together with cache reuse, diagnostics and test-validated fixes. The published cache results show one of the places where that CI focus pays off.

For CI, compare completed-job cost and feedback time alongside the minute rate. Avrea's included usage lets you test those differences on your own workflow before paying for runner minutes.

Common questions

Is Ubicloud cheaper than Avrea?

Per minute, yes. Ubicloud lists $0.00125 per minute for a standard 2-vCPU / 8-GB x64 runner and $0.002 for premium, against Avrea's $0.004. The monthly bill also depends on how long jobs run and on included usage: Avrea includes 3,000 minutes a month and Ubicloud gives $2.50 of monthly credit.

Do I have to self-host Ubicloud to use its runners?

No. Ubicloud's managed GitHub Actions runners are a hosted service, like Avrea's. Deploying its open-source cloud software on your own servers is a separate option that the runner comparison above does not depend on.

Which is faster, Avrea or Ubicloud?

In RunsOn's 14 October 2026 x64 results, Avrea has the higher single-thread score at 2, 4 and 8 vCPU and the higher all-core score at 2 and 4 vCPU; Ubicloud premium leads all-core at 8 vCPU. Avrea restored a 4 GB Actions cache in 14 seconds against 66 to 72 seconds on Ubicloud. These are component tests, not complete build times.

Does Ubicloud run macOS or Windows jobs?

Its managed runner catalog lists Ubuntu Linux on x64 and ARM. Avrea runs Linux, macOS and Windows jobs, so teams building Apple or Windows applications have a different requirement to account for.

Related reading

• Fastest GitHub Actions runners: CPU scores, caching and real-build evidence.
• GitHub Actions pricing: rates, included usage and completed-job costs.
• GitHub Actions caching: cache keys, build outputs and persistent storage.
• Avrea vs Blacksmith: CPU and cache benchmarks, Docker caching and AI-assisted fixes.
• Avrea vs WarpBuild: equal x64 minute rates, cache benchmarks and BYOC.
• All runner comparisons: the wider provider comparison.