Octo Browser vs Dolphin {anty} — Which Anti-Detect Should You Pick?
Two leading anti-detect browsers compared on fingerprint, team workspace, performance, and pricing.
Octo Browser (#2) and Dolphin {anty} (#8) sit four positions apart in our 2026 ranking. The gap is mostly about engine modernity and team workspace polish.
Fingerprint engine
Octo covers the full 47-surface inventory with WireGuard-based WebRTC tunneling. Dolphin covers ~36 surfaces and doesn't tunnel UDP — disable-by-default WebRTC is its approach. For high-detection verticals (FB Ads, TikTok Ads, crypto KYC), the gap shows.
For low-stakes work (e-com, account farming), both are functional.
Team workspace
Both ship 5-role workspaces with audit logs. Dolphin's UX is slightly more polished; Octo's is more enterprise-y. For agencies, Octo's EU-billing entity matters; for CIS teams, Dolphin's Russian-language support matters.
Performance
Both Electron-based. Octo is the leaner of the two — cold-start 2.7s vs Dolphin 3.4s; RAM per profile 220MB vs 290MB on our M2 32GB benchmark. For 100+ profile workflows, that's meaningful.
Pricing
| Tier | Octo | Dolphin |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Trial only | 10 profiles |
| Solo | $29 | $89 |
| Team | $79 | $159 |
| Enterprise | $199 | $299 |
Octo is cheaper at every tier above Free. Dolphin's free tier is generous; Octo doesn't have one.
Plugin ecosystem
Dolphin wins clearly. If your workflow depends on specific Dolphin plugins (see our marketplace guide), migration cost is real.
Verdict
For new operators in 2026, pick Octo Browser — cleaner engine, lower price, better performance. For established Dolphin teams with plugin dependencies, the migration math may favour staying.
For premium needs, both lose to Afina — see our Afina vs Octo comparison.