GitHub Actions vs Jenkins

Overview

GitHub Actions vs Jenkins at a glance

A quick comparison across the dimensions that affect cost, developer experience, and operational burden.

Pricing

GitHub Actions vs Jenkins: how pricing actually works

Jenkins is open source and free to download. GitHub Actions charges per minute on hosted runners. This makes a direct price comparison misleading, because Jenkins shifts the cost from a vendor bill to your infrastructure and ops team. The real question is: what does each option cost when you add up everything?

GitHub Actions includes 2,000 free minutes/month on Free, 3,000 on Team/Pro, and 50,000 on Enterprise. Overage on the standard Linux 2-core runner is $0.006/min. Windows costs $0.010/min and macOS costs $0.062/min. GitHub rounds each job up to the nearest whole minute. Self-hosted runners have no per-minute platform charge.

Jenkins has no license cost. Your spending goes to: compute (EC2, GCE, or bare metal for the controller and agents), storage (artifacts, logs, workspace), networking, and the engineering time to keep it running. A common pattern is one controller instance plus autoscaling agents. The controller alone (a t3.large or similar with 50 GB EBS) runs about $60-80/mo on AWS. Each build agent adds more. CloudBees, the commercial Jenkins company, charges per-user for its managed enterprise offering, starting around $500/user/year.

At this workload (50 builds/day, 8 min avg, one team), GitHub Actions costs about $35/mo in compute overage plus the Team plan per-user fee. Jenkins costs roughly $120/mo in infrastructure plus the ops time to maintain it. The ops burden is the hidden cost. Plugin upgrades break things, Java version bumps require testing, and security patches need prompt attention. If your team already has a dedicated platform team managing Jenkins, the marginal cost is lower. If your CI is owned by the same developers writing features, the opportunity cost of Jenkins maintenance is real.

One caveat: at large scale (thousands of builds/day), Jenkins on spot instances with aggressive autoscaling can be cheaper than GitHub Actions hosted runners. The crossover point depends on your build volume, agent utilization, and whether you have the ops capacity to manage it. Self-hosted runners on GitHub Actions are another option that combines GitHub's orchestration with your own compute.

Configuration

YAML vs Groovy: how pipeline config compares

This is the most visible difference between the two platforms. GitHub Actions uses declarative YAML. Jenkins uses Groovy (either Declarative Pipeline or Scripted Pipeline syntax). YAML is simpler to read and write. Groovy is a full programming language, which gives you more power but also more ways to create unmaintainable pipeline code.

Here is the same pipeline (lint, test, build) on each platform:

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

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

  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

  build:
    needs: [lint, test]
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
      - run: npm run build

pipeline {
  agent any
  tools {
    nodejs 'node-20'
  }
  stages {
    stage('Lint') {
      steps {
        sh 'npm ci'
        sh 'npm run lint'
      }
    }
    stage('Test') {
      steps {
        sh 'npm test'
      }
    }
    stage('Build') {
      steps {
        sh 'npm run build'
      }
    }
  }
}

The structural difference: GitHub Actions defines triggers, jobs, and steps together in a YAML file. Each job gets its own runner and runs in parallel by default; you use needs: to create dependencies. Jenkins Declarative Pipeline runs stages sequentially by default on a single agent. To run stages in parallel, you wrap them in a parallel block. Jenkins also requires a checkout step implicitly (the agent directive clones the repo), while GitHub Actions requires an explicit actions/checkout step.

Jenkins Scripted Pipeline (the older syntax) gives you full Groovy: loops, conditionals, try/catch, arbitrary function calls. Declarative Pipeline is more structured but still allows script { } blocks for escape hatches. GitHub Actions is pure YAML with expression syntax (${{ }}) for conditionals and variable interpolation. If you need complex logic, you write it in a shell step or a custom action, not in the pipeline config itself.

Runners

GitHub Actions runners vs Jenkins agents

GitHub calls them runners. Jenkins calls them agents (or nodes). Both platforms can run builds on hosted or self-provisioned compute, but the default model is different.

GitHub Actions provides managed runners out of the box. You specify runs-on: ubuntu-latest and GitHub provisions a fresh VM for each job. No infrastructure to set up or maintain. Jenkins requires you to provision and manage every agent yourself. You install the Jenkins agent process on each machine, connect it to the controller, and handle OS updates, disk cleanup, and capacity planning.

jobs:
  test:
    # Managed runner, fresh VM every job
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
      - run: npm test

  build-ios:
    # macOS runner for Xcode builds
    runs-on: macos-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4
      - run: xcodebuild test

pipeline {
  // Agent by label, you manage the node
  agent {
    label 'linux'
  }
  stages {
    stage('Test') {
      steps {
        sh 'npm test'
      }
    }
    stage('Build iOS') {
      agent {
        label 'macos'
      }
      steps {
        sh 'xcodebuild test'
      }
    }
  }
}

GitHub Actions runners are ephemeral: each job gets a clean VM that is destroyed after the job finishes. This eliminates drift and "works on my agent" problems, but means every job starts from scratch (no persistent workspace). Jenkins agents are typically persistent: they stay connected and reuse their workspace between builds, which makes builds faster (no re-cloning, cached dependencies on disk) but introduces state drift over time.

For self-hosted runners, GitHub Actions uses a lightweight runner application you install on your own machines. The runner polls GitHub for work and executes jobs. Jenkins uses a Java agent process with more operational overhead. Both support Docker-based builds: GitHub via container: in the workflow, Jenkins via the Docker Pipeline plugin or agent { docker { image '...' } }.

Caching

How caching works on each platform

Caching dependencies between builds is one of the biggest cost and speed optimizations in CI. The two platforms handle this very differently.

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

// No built-in cache. Common workarounds:

// 1. Persistent agent workspace
//    (node_modules survives between builds)

// 2. stash/unstash within a single build
stage('Install') {
  steps {
    sh 'npm ci'
    stash includes: 'node_modules/**',
          name: 'deps'
  }
}
stage('Test') {
  steps {
    unstash 'deps'
    sh 'npm test'
  }
}

GitHub Actions has a purpose-built caching system via the actions/cache action. You specify what to cache, a key based on a lockfile hash, and fallback restore keys. Caches are stored remotely (10 GB per repository) and restored at the start of each job. This works well with ephemeral runners because the cache survives across runs even though the VM does not.

Jenkins has no built-in cross-build caching. The two common workarounds are: persistent agent workspaces (the node_modules directory just stays on disk between builds) and stash/unstash (which copies files between stages within a single build, but not between builds). Third-party plugins like Job Cacher add S3-backed caching, but it is not a first-party feature. The persistent workspace approach is faster but creates agent state drift, a tradeoff GitHub Actions avoids entirely.

Ecosystem

1,800 plugins vs 21,000 marketplace actions

Both platforms are extensible, but the extension model is fundamentally different. Jenkins plugins run inside the controller JVM and can modify nearly any aspect of Jenkins (UI, security, SCM, build steps, reporting). GitHub Actions are isolated units that run as steps in your workflow, either as Docker containers or JavaScript.

# Use a marketplace action
steps:
  - uses: actions/checkout@v4
  - uses: aws-actions/configure-aws-credentials@v4
    with:
      role-to-assume: ${{ secrets.AWS_ROLE }}
      aws-region: us-east-1
  - run: aws s3 sync ./dist s3://my-bucket

// Use a Jenkins plugin (installed on controller)
stage('Deploy') {
  steps {
    withCredentials([
      [$class: 'AmazonWebServicesCredentialsBinding',
       credentialsId: 'aws-creds']
    ]) {
      sh 'aws s3 sync ./dist s3://my-bucket'
    }
  }
}

Jenkins plugins have deeper system access. A plugin can change how the Jenkins UI renders, add new credential types, integrate with enterprise SSO, or modify how agents connect. This power comes with risk: plugin compatibility issues are one of the most common sources of Jenkins downtime. Upgrading Jenkins core or Java versions frequently breaks plugins, and many plugins are maintained by single contributors.

GitHub Actions are more isolated. Each action runs in its own process or container and communicates with the runner via a well-defined API. This means one bad action cannot crash your CI server. The marketplace has over 21,000 actions, though many are low-quality or unmaintained. Pin actions to specific commit SHAs (not just tags) in production workflows to avoid supply-chain attacks.

Matrix builds

Multi-platform and multi-version testing

Both platforms support running the same pipeline across multiple OS, language version, or configuration combinations. The implementation differs.

test:
  strategy:
    matrix:
      os: [ubuntu-latest, windows-latest]
      node: [18, 20, 22]
  runs-on: ${{ matrix.os }}
  steps:
    - uses: actions/checkout@v4
    - uses: actions/setup-node@v4
      with:
        node-version: ${{ matrix.node }}
    - run: npm test

stage('Test') {
  matrix {
    axes {
      axis {
        name 'PLATFORM'
        values 'linux', 'windows'
      }
      axis {
        name 'NODE_VER'
        values '18', '20', '22'
      }
    }
    agent {
      label "${PLATFORM}"
    }
    stages {
      stage('Run') {
        steps {
          sh "npm test"
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

GitHub Actions' strategy.matrix is more concise. You define axes as arrays and GitHub generates all combinations automatically. Jenkins added matrix support in Declarative Pipeline (since Jenkins 2.270), but the syntax is more verbose. In both cases, each combination runs as a separate parallel execution. On GitHub Actions, each matrix cell gets its own runner; on Jenkins, each cell needs an available agent with the matching label.

One caveat: Jenkins matrix builds require that you have agents provisioned for every label in your axes. If you define 'linux', 'windows', 'macos' as platform values, you need agents for all three. On GitHub Actions, managed runners for all three OS types are available immediately, and you only pay for the minutes you use.

Decision framework

When to choose GitHub Actions

• Your code is on GitHub and you want zero CI infrastructure. GitHub Actions requires no servers, no agents, no Java upgrades. PR checks, branch protection, status checks, and deployments integrate without additional configuration.

• Your team does not have (or want) a dedicated CI/CD platform team. Jenkins requires ongoing maintenance: controller upgrades, plugin compatibility checks, agent provisioning, disk cleanup, backup strategies. If your CI is maintained by the same engineers writing features, GitHub Actions eliminates that operational burden.

• You want YAML-based config that lives in the repo. GitHub Actions workflows are versioned alongside your code. There is no separate CI server to configure, no UI-based job setup. Everything is code-reviewed in the same PR as the application change.

• You need multi-OS builds without managing the machines. GitHub provides managed Linux, Windows, macOS, and ARM runners. On Jenkins, you provision and maintain every OS target yourself.

Decision framework

When to choose Jenkins

• You need CI in an air-gapped or on-premises environment. Jenkins runs entirely on your infrastructure with no cloud dependency. For organizations in regulated industries (finance, defense, healthcare) that cannot send code or build artifacts to external services, Jenkins is one of the few mature options.

• You have complex, non-standard automation requirements. Jenkins Scripted Pipeline gives you a full programming language (Groovy). If your CI needs to orchestrate hardware test rigs, interact with proprietary APIs mid-pipeline, or implement custom approval flows, Jenkins Shared Libraries let you build reusable Groovy functions that any pipeline can call.

• You run thousands of builds per day and want to control costs. At high volume, self-managed compute (spot instances, reserved instances, bare metal) can be significantly cheaper per minute than GitHub's hosted runners. If you already have a platform team managing Jenkins, the marginal cost of scaling is mostly compute.

• Your repositories are not on GitHub. Jenkins works with any Git host (GitLab, Bitbucket, Gitea, self-hosted) and many non-Git SCMs. GitHub Actions only works with GitHub repositories. If your code is on GitLab or Bitbucket, Jenkins is a natural fit.

Migration

What to know before switching

Migrating between Jenkins and GitHub Actions is not a syntax translation. The pipeline models are different enough that most Jenkinsfiles need to be rewritten from scratch. Here are the primary friction points:

• Groovy logic becomes shell scripts or custom actions. Jenkins pipelines often embed business logic in Groovy: conditional stage execution, dynamic parameter generation, error handling with try/catch. In GitHub Actions, this logic moves into shell steps, if: conditions on jobs/steps, or custom JavaScript/Docker actions. There is no 1:1 translation for Scripted Pipeline constructs.

• Shared Libraries have no direct equivalent. Jenkins Shared Libraries let you define reusable Groovy functions in a separate repository and call them from any Jenkinsfile. The closest GitHub Actions equivalent is reusable workflows and custom actions, but these are more constrained than arbitrary Groovy code.

• Credentials and secrets work differently. Jenkins stores credentials in its built-in credential store, accessed via withCredentials or credentials() in the pipeline. GitHub uses repository, environment, and organization-level secrets accessed via ${{ secrets.NAME }}. You will need to manually recreate every credential. Neither platform supports import/export.

• Jenkins plugins may not have action equivalents. Niche plugins for hardware integration, enterprise systems, or proprietary tools may not have GitHub Actions marketplace equivalents. Audit your plugin list before committing to a migration.

GitHub provides an official migration guide from Jenkins to GitHub Actions that covers syntax mappings. The key directive translations: agent → runs-on, stages → jobs, when → if, tools → setup-* actions.