GitHub Pages vs Vercel: which one fits your project?

Anyone with a project already sitting in a GitHub repo runs into this choice eventually. GitHub Pages ships free with the account you already have, no extra sign-up. Vercel is a much larger platform that also happens to deploy from GitHub, but it's built around framework builds and preview deploys rather than "just serve this repo."

GitHub Pages vs Vercel at a glance

	GitHub Pages	Vercel
Deploy method	Push to a branch, or a GitHub Actions workflow	Git-connected build triggered on push, preview URL per branch
Free tier	Free, unlimited for public repos	Hobby tier, free and generous for personal/non-commercial use
Custom domain	Yes, via a CNAME file, free HTTPS	Yes, free HTTPS
Build/CI required	Optional — a plain static branch needs none	Yes, framework-aware build pipeline runs on every push
Best for	Docs sites, project pages already living in a repo	Framework apps (Next.js and others) needing SSR, API routes, or preview deploys

When to choose GitHub Pages

If the project is a static site or docs page that already lives in a GitHub repo, Pages is the path of least resistance. There's no separate account to create, no build step to configure if you don't need one, and the repo stays the single source of truth. It's a strong default for open-source project pages and documentation sites in particular.

When to choose Vercel

If your project is built with a framework — Next.js especially, but also Astro, SvelteKit, and others — and needs server-rendered pages, API routes, or a real build pipeline, Vercel is doing work that Pages simply can't. The preview URL Vercel generates for every pull request is also genuinely useful for review, in a way that doesn't have a direct GitHub Pages equivalent.

If you just need to host static files

Both of these assume you're committed to a Git-based workflow with a repo behind every deploy. If your project is plain HTML/CSS/JS with no build step and no repo you particularly want to maintain, that's more setup than the job needs. Flaash covers that narrower case: drag a folder or .zip into the browser and it's live on a flaash.live subdomain immediately, no Git, no build config. It doesn't support custom domains, though — if that matters, GitHub Pages (free, via CNAME) or Vercel (free, on Hobby) both cover it where Flaash currently doesn't.

Frequently asked questions

Can I use GitHub Pages and Vercel for the same repo? Yes, nothing stops you from connecting both, though most people pick one to avoid managing two live URLs for the same project.

Does Vercel work for a plain static site with no framework? It does, but there's no manual drag-and-drop flow — it's built around a Git-connected build pipeline even for static output, which is more setup than a static folder usually needs.

Which is better for a personal portfolio site? If it's plain HTML, GitHub Pages is the simpler choice. If it's built with a framework and you want fast iteration with preview URLs, Vercel's workflow is worth the extra setup.