Nx vs Turborepo: Which One Actually Sucks Less?

Look, I spent like 3 months benchmarking these because our CI was taking forever and everyone was pissed. Here's the real story without the marketing bullshit:

Nx Architecture: Rust-powered dependency graph computation with daemon processes

The Rust Rewrite Actually Matters

Nx rewrote the slow parts in Rust: This isn't marketing fluff. The dependency graph stuff went from "time for coffee" to "done already." When you're dealing with 50+ apps, native code destroys JavaScript. Our graph computation went from ~30 seconds to like 200ms in Nx 20. Check the benchmarks yourself if you don't believe me.

The daemon doesn't completely suck: Yeah, it crashes sometimes. Maybe once every few weeks, builds get weird slow, you run nx reset, and everything's fast again. Annoying but not a dealbreaker. When it works, the daemon pre-computes your dependency graph so builds are instant. The performance gains are real when you're not recomputing project graphs constantly.

Project References changed everything: Our TypeScript builds went from "let's grab lunch" to "oh, that's done." Instead of TypeScript trying to understand our entire monorepo, it now compiles each project separately. Dropped build times from like 12 minutes to maybe 3-4 minutes. The official Nx TypeScript guide explains the technical details if you're curious.

Nx Terminal UI: Interactive build progress with smart caching visualization

Turborepo's Simpler But Hits a Wall

Pipeline execution is brain-dead simple: Define your tasks, Turborepo runs them. No fancy graph algorithms, no daemon processes. Just works. Until your repo gets big enough that "just works" isn't fast enough. Their task pipeline docs are actually pretty good.

File hashing kills performance: Every build, Turborepo hashes every file to decide what needs rebuilding. Works great for 10 apps. Gets painful with 30+ apps when you're hashing thousands of files every build. This is a known limitation that comes up in larger repos.

Vercel caching actually rocks: The remote caching integration is seamless. Set it up once, never think about it. Your CI shares cache with local dev builds. Nx Cloud does the same thing but with more configuration headaches. Turborepo's approach just works, which is more than I can say for most tools.

When It Actually Matters

Small repos (5-15 apps): Both feel fast. The difference exists but you won't care. Stick with Turborepo for simplicity. Check out the migration guide if you're coming from package.json scripts.

Medium repos (15-30 apps): You'll notice Nx being snappier. Whether it's worth the migration pain depends on how much slow builds annoy you. The Nx migration guide is actually pretty solid, but budget 2-3 weeks for a proper migration.

Big repos (30+ apps): The performance gap becomes real. We're talking 10+ minutes with Turborepo vs 2-3 minutes with Nx's computation caching. That's "I can actually get work done" territory. See the detailed comparison for more benchmarks across different repo sizes.

Used both across a few different gigs. Here's when each one actually makes sense:

Decision Matrix: When to choose each tool based on repo size and team needs

Pick Nx If:

• Your builds take more than 5 minutes and it's driving everyone crazy
• You have 20+ apps and can survive 2-3 weeks of migration hell
• You don't mind dealing with daemon crashes and weird plugin issues
• Someone on your team actually likes complex tooling
• You need affected testing - only running tests for changed code
• Enterprise features matter (distributed task execution, etc.)

Pick Turborepo If:

• You want it to work tomorrow, not next month
• Your team is small and builds are "meh, could be better" not "this is ruining our lives"
• You're already using Vercel (the integration just works)
• You value your sanity over maximum performance
• Simple configuration is more important than advanced features
• You need quick onboarding for new developers

Turborepo Architecture: Simple pipeline execution with file-based caching

The Stuff Nobody Warns You About:

Nx will break things: Budget time. The migration guides help but you'll hit weird edge cases. We lost like 2 weeks just fixing random stuff that the migration script couldn't handle. Check the known issues before starting.

Turborepo hits a wall: Works great until it doesn't. Around 15-20 apps, you'll start noticing the pain. At 30+ apps, you'll be googling "nx migration guide." This is a documented limitation in large repos.

Version-specific gotchas: Nx 18.2 had this caching bug where cache would corrupt randomly. Nx 19.1 fixed it but broke our ESLint setup. Turborepo 2.0 changed their config format and didn't migrate everything properly. Always check release notes before upgrading.

Real Cost Analysis (Not Marketing Math)

Nx migration costs:

• 2-3 weeks developer time for initial setup
• Another week fixing edge cases and plugin configuration
• Maybe $500-2000/month for Nx Cloud if you go that route
• Factor in developer training time for the more complex concepts

Turborepo sticks with simple:

• 2-3 days to set up properly
• Remote caching free on Vercel
• Performance ceiling around 20 apps (documented limitation)
• Migration path exists but limited compared to Nx

The breakeven point is somewhere around 15-20 apps where Nx's speed advantage outweighs the migration pain. Below that, Turborepo's simplicity wins. Above that, you're paying for slow builds with developer frustration. Check the detailed benchmarks if you want the actual numbers.