GitHub Actions vs Azure DevOps

Overview

What are the key differences between GitHub Actions and Azure DevOps?

The biggest differences are pricing model (per-minute vs flat-rate), pipeline structure (jobs vs stages), and extensibility (marketplace actions vs YAML templates). Here is a side-by-side comparison.

Pricing

Is GitHub Actions cheaper than Azure DevOps?

It depends on volume and OS. GitHub Actions charges per minute: $0.006/min for Linux, $0.010/min for Windows, $0.062/min for macOS. Azure Pipelines charges a flat $40/month per Microsoft-hosted parallel job with unlimited minutes and no OS-based price differentiation. Self-hosted parallel jobs cost $15/month each on Azure DevOps.

GitHub Actions includes 2,000 free minutes/month on Free, 3,000 on Team/Pro, and 50,000 on Enterprise. Free tier minutes are consumed at multiplied rates: 2x for Windows, 10x for macOS. Each job is rounded up to the nearest whole minute.

Azure Pipelines gives private projects 1 free parallel job with a 1,800-minute monthly cap. Buying your first parallel job at $40/month removes the time cap but keeps concurrency at 1. To run 2 jobs simultaneously, you buy 2 parallel jobs ($80/month). Public projects get 10 free parallel jobs with unlimited minutes. New organizations must request the free grant, which can take several business days.

On top of pipeline costs, Azure DevOps charges $6/user/month for Basic access (first 5 users free). GitHub Team costs $4/user/month.

At this workload (50 Linux builds/day, 8 min avg), GitHub Actions costs about $35/mo in compute while Azure Pipelines costs $120/mo for 3 parallel jobs. GitHub Actions is cheaper at moderate Linux-only volumes because you only pay for minutes you use. Azure's flat-rate model means you pay the same whether you run 100 builds or 10,000.

One caveat: the math flips at higher volumes and for non-Linux workloads. A team running 200 builds/day at 8 minutes would consume 35,200 minutes/month. On GitHub Actions at $0.006/min, that costs about $193/mo after the Team plan included minutes. On Azure Pipelines with 5 parallel jobs, it stays at $200/mo. And if those builds are on Windows or macOS, GitHub Actions gets significantly more expensive (Windows at $0.010/min, macOS at $0.062/min), while Azure Pipelines stays flat. Azure's model favors high-volume, multi-OS teams.

Configuration

How do GitHub Actions and Azure DevOps YAML configs differ?

Both platforms use YAML, but the structure differs. GitHub Actions defines triggers, jobs, and steps in a single file that IS the pipeline. Azure DevOps separates the YAML definition from a pipeline object created in the UI or API. Azure also has native multi-stage support with stages: as a top-level concept; GitHub Actions only has jobs connected via needs:.

Here is the same pipeline (checkout, install, test, deploy) on each platform:

name: CI
on:
  push:
    branches: [main]
  pull_request:

jobs:
  test:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
      - uses: actions/setup-node@v4
        with:
          node-version: 20
      - run: npm ci
      - run: npm test

  deploy:
    needs: test
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - run: echo "deploying"

trigger:
  branches:
    include:
      - main
pr:
  branches:
    include:
      - main

stages:
  - stage: Test
    jobs:
      - job: TestJob
        pool:
          vmImage: 'ubuntu-latest'
        steps:
          - task: UseNode@1
            inputs:
              version: '20.x'
          - script: npm ci
          - script: npm test

  - stage: Deploy
    dependsOn: Test
    jobs:
      - deployment: DeployJob
        environment: production
        strategy:
          runOnce:
            deploy:
              steps:
                - script: echo "deploying"

Key structural differences: GitHub Actions uses on: for triggers, Azure uses separate trigger: and pr: keywords. GitHub Actions defines jobs that run in parallel by default; you add ordering with needs:. Azure DevOps wraps jobs in stages that run sequentially by default; you add dependsOn: to create dependencies between stages.

Another difference: conditionals. GitHub Actions uses infix notation (if: github.ref == 'refs/heads/main'). Azure DevOps uses function-based expressions (condition: eq(variables['Build.SourceBranch'], 'refs/heads/main')). Azure's expression syntax is more verbose but also more powerful for complex conditions. GitHub's approach is simpler for common cases.

Triggers

What triggers does GitHub Actions support that Azure DevOps does not?

GitHub Actions supports triggers for any GitHub event: push, pull_request, issue comments, labels, releases, wiki edits, and more. Azure Pipelines only triggers on push (trigger:), pull requests (pr:), schedules, and pipeline completion. It does not support arbitrary repository event triggers.

on:
  push:
    branches: [main]
  pull_request:
    branches: [main]
  schedule:
    - cron: '0 2 * * 1'
  issue_comment:
    types: [created]
  release:
    types: [published]

trigger:
  branches:
    include:
      - main
pr:
  branches:
    include:
      - main
schedules:
  - cron: '0 2 * * 1'
    displayName: Weekly Monday build
    branches:
      include:
        - main

# No equivalent for issue_comment
# or release triggers

GitHub Actions' trigger breadth enables workflows that go beyond CI: auto-labeling issues, deploying on release publish, running security scans on schedule, or triggering builds from slash commands in PR comments. Azure Pipelines is more focused on the traditional push/PR/schedule model. If your automation only needs push, PR, and schedule triggers, both platforms cover it. If you want event-driven automation tied to your repository lifecycle, GitHub Actions has a significant advantage.

One caveat: GitHub Actions has a built-in concurrency: key that auto-cancels superseded runs. Azure Pipelines has no direct equivalent; jobs queue until a parallel slot opens, but there is no automatic cancellation of stale runs. This can lead to wasted compute on Azure if multiple pushes happen in quick succession.

Templates

Which has better reusable pipeline templates?

Azure DevOps has a more flexible template system. Azure templates can be inserted at any level of the YAML: variables, steps, jobs, or stages. A single template file can define shared configuration and be included with one line. Each step inside a template remains individually visible in pipeline logs.

GitHub Actions has two reusability mechanisms: reusable workflows (called at the job level, max 4 levels of nesting) and composite actions (groups of steps reusable as a single step, max 10 levels of nesting). Neither matches the fine-grained "inject anywhere" flexibility of Azure templates.

# Reusable workflow (job level)
jobs:
  test:
    uses: ./.github/workflows/test.yml
    with:
      node-version: 20
    secrets: inherit

# Composite action (step level)
steps:
  - uses: ./.github/actions/setup
    with:
      node-version: 20

# Template at stage level
stages:
  - template: stages/test.yml
    parameters:
      nodeVersion: '20.x'

# Template at step level
steps:
  - template: steps/setup.yml
    parameters:
      nodeVersion: '20.x'

# Template at variable level
variables:
  - template: vars/shared.yml

For organizations with many pipelines sharing common patterns, Azure's template system is more powerful and ergonomic. You can factor out variable definitions, step sequences, entire jobs, or whole stages into reusable template files. Each individual step in a template appears as its own entry in the pipeline logs, making debugging straightforward.

GitHub Actions composite actions appear as a single collapsed step in logs, and reusable workflows cannot access secrets directly without secrets: inherit or explicit mapping. If your team maintains a shared CI library, Azure's template model will feel more natural. If your reuse needs are simpler (a handful of shared workflows), GitHub's model is adequate.

Caching

How does caching differ between GitHub Actions and Azure DevOps?

Both platforms offer dependency caching to speed up builds. GitHub Actions uses actions/cache with a 10 GB per-repo limit and LRU eviction. Azure DevOps uses Cache@2 with configurable storage limits and built-in OS-specific cache key segmentation.

steps:
  - uses: actions/cache@v4
    with:
      path: ~/.npm
      key: npm-${{ hashFiles('**/package-lock.json') }}
      restore-keys: npm-
  - run: npm ci

steps:
  - task: Cache@2
    inputs:
      key: 'npm | "$(Agent.OS)" | **/package-lock.json'
      restoreKeys: |
        npm | "$(Agent.OS)"
      path: $(Pipeline.Workspace)/.npm
  - script: npm ci

GitHub Actions' actions/cache stores up to 10 GB per repository. Caches from the default branch are available to all branches; feature branch caches are scoped to that branch or the default. Eviction is LRU-based when the limit is reached. Setup actions like actions/setup-node@v4 support built-in caching with cache: 'npm', which simplifies configuration.

Azure DevOps' Cache@2 task scopes caches by pipeline, branch, and key. Storage limits are configurable at the project or organization level. Azure's cache keys support OS-specific segmentation by default via $(Agent.OS), which is useful for cross-platform builds. Neither platform has a clear advantage here; the choice depends on whether 10 GB per repo is enough and whether you need the OS-specific key segments.

Deployments

Which has better deployment and environment support?

Azure DevOps has a more mature deployment model. Native multi-stage pipelines support deployment jobs with environment approvals, automated gates (Azure Functions, REST API checks, work item queries), environment locks, and configurable approval logic (all/any/ordered, with no fixed cap on approvers). Deployment strategies like rolling, canary, and blue-green are built into the YAML syntax.

GitHub Actions has environment protection rules including required reviewers (up to 6 users or teams), wait timers, branch/tag restrictions, and custom deployment protection rules via GitHub Apps. This covers many use cases, but lacks Azure's built-in deployment strategies and fine-grained gate types.

deploy:
  runs-on: ubuntu-latest
  environment: production
  # Reviewers, wait timers configured
  # in repo Settings > Environments
  steps:
    - uses: actions/checkout@v4
    - run: ./deploy.sh

- stage: Deploy
  jobs:
    - deployment: Production
      environment: production
      # Approvals, gates, locks
      # configured on the environment
      strategy:
        rolling:
          maxParallel: 2
          deploy:
            steps:
              - script: ./deploy.sh

If your deployment workflows need rolling updates, canary releases, or automated pre-deployment health checks, Azure DevOps handles these natively. On GitHub Actions, you would implement these patterns in shell scripts or custom actions. For simpler deployments (deploy to staging, get approval, deploy to production), both platforms work well.

Decision framework

When should you choose GitHub Actions over Azure DevOps?

GitHub Actions is the better choice when your code lives on GitHub, your builds are primarily Linux, your CI/CD volume is moderate, or you need event-driven automation beyond push and PR triggers.

• Your code is on GitHub and you want native integration. PR checks, status checks, branch protection, and deployments work without additional configuration. There is no separate CI system to manage or connect.

• You run moderate Linux-heavy workloads. At typical volumes (under ~150 builds/day on Linux), GitHub Actions' per-minute model is cheaper than Azure's flat per-job pricing. You only pay for what you use.

• You want event-driven automation beyond CI. GitHub Actions can trigger on issues, comments, labels, releases, and more. If your automation extends beyond push/PR/schedule triggers, Actions' event model is broader.

• You value marketplace breadth. With 21,000+ marketplace actions, GitHub has the largest ecosystem of reusable CI components. Most common integrations (AWS, GCP, Docker, Slack) have well-maintained official actions.

Decision framework

When should you choose Azure DevOps over GitHub Actions?

Azure DevOps is the better choice for high-volume or multi-OS build environments, teams needing an integrated ALM platform, and organizations that rely on advanced deployment orchestration or shared YAML template libraries.

• You need an all-in-one ALM platform. Azure DevOps bundles Boards (project management), Repos (Git hosting), Pipelines (CI/CD), Artifacts (package management), and Test Plans. If your team needs these integrated under one roof with enterprise RBAC and Entra ID (Azure AD) integration, Azure DevOps is purpose-built for this.

• You run high-volume or multi-OS builds. Azure's flat $40/job/month pricing means unlimited minutes regardless of OS. If you run Windows or macOS builds at scale, the cost advantage over GitHub Actions' per-minute pricing (especially macOS at $0.062/min) can be substantial.

• You need advanced deployment orchestration. Native multi-stage pipelines with rolling, canary, and blue-green strategies, combined with environment gates (Azure Monitor checks, work item queries, REST API gates), give Azure DevOps a more mature deployment model than GitHub Actions' environment protection rules.

• You rely on fine-grained YAML templates. Azure's template system supports injection at the variable, step, job, and stage level. For organizations maintaining a shared CI library across many pipelines, this is more flexible than GitHub's reusable workflow and composite action model.

Migration

What breaks when migrating between GitHub Actions and Azure DevOps?

Both platforms use YAML, which makes migration look simpler than it is. The pipeline models are different enough that most pipelines need meaningful rework. Five features do not have direct equivalents across platforms:

• Stages become jobs. Azure Pipelines' stages: concept has no direct equivalent in GitHub Actions. Stages are typically converted to jobs with needs: dependencies, losing some orchestration semantics.

• Variable groups have no GitHub equivalent. Azure DevOps variable groups (secret and non-secret variables shared across pipelines) must be migrated to GitHub repository, organization, or environment secrets. GitHub has no concept of "variable groups" that span multiple workflows.

• Secure Files have no equivalent. Azure Pipelines supports Secure Files for certificates, provisioning profiles, and keystores. GitHub Actions has no built-in equivalent; teams typically move these to Azure Key Vault, HashiCorp Vault, or base64-encoded secrets.

• Deployment strategies do not migrate directly. Azure's strategy: rolling, strategy: canary, and environment gates need to be reimplemented as custom logic in GitHub Actions workflows.

• Default shell differs on Windows. Azure DevOps defaults to cmd.exe on Windows agents. GitHub Actions defaults to PowerShell. Scripts that rely on cmd.exe behavior may break silently.

GitHub provides an official migration guide from Azure Pipelines to GitHub Actions and the GitHub Actions Importer tool that converts Azure DevOps pipelines to GitHub Actions workflows. The Importer produces a starting point, but output typically requires manual adjustments. Key directive translations: trigger: → on: push:, pool: → runs-on:, dependsOn: → needs:, script: → run:.

If you are migrating in the other direction (GitHub to Azure DevOps), note that Azure Boards, Repos, and Artifacts are separate services that need to be set up. Azure DevOps also has a classic (GUI) pipeline editor alongside YAML, which can be useful during transition but is not recommended for new pipelines.