JetKVM | Senior Fullstack Engineer | Remote (CET ±3) | Full-Time | Go / TypeScript / WebRTC | Open Source
JetKVM builds open-source KVM-over-IP hardware that lets you control any computer — BIOS and all — through your browser. After raising $6M on Kickstarter (the #3 most-backed tech project ever), we’re scaling production and software for tens of thousands of users.
We’re looking for a Senior Fullstack Engineer to work across our stack — Go, Node.js, React, and WebRTC — from backend APIs to low-level firmware integrations. You’ll shape architecture, improve video streaming and authentication, and ship features end-to-end in a small, fast-moving team.
Open-source, async, and remote(CET+/-3).
While more cores can certainly help with certain types of projects, such as those that can be easily parallelized, this is not always the case. For example, web app projects won't benefit as much from additional cores.
Another important factor to consider is the single-core performance of each vCPU. Many server-class CPUs, such as those used by GitHub, are built with a very high-core count but with a very low single-core speed. In contrast, BuildJet uses consumer CPUs, such as the 5950x, which offer slightly less core count but an excellent single-core speed.
It's quite astonishing how slow "the cloud"/server-class CPUs can be, we compared my old MacBook Pro 2015 vs. a 2vCPU GitHub actions runner and the MBP 2015 won most of the time.
BuildJet's bet is that single-core performance is critical for a fast CI, and it appears that the self-hosting comments here on HN also agree.
(We're working our own CI, DM me if you're interested in the fastest CI on the market)
Super interesting, not seen BuildJet before, seems like a great concept. Sent it to a few friends that might find it useful. I wonder if there are other CI systems you could make runners for, maybe Gitlab/Buildkite? "The ultimate compute solution for your CI"
> BuildJet's bet is that single-core performance is critical for a fast CI,
Yes, but an even larger impact often comes from caching dependencies (node_modules/vendors/lint checks/etc). Caching via GitHub actions is slow, and if BuildJet would offer a custom GHA action with _local_ SSD caching, it would give a big advantage to people chasing fast CI.
I imagine non-core-product teams at Google are encouraged to submit purchase requests for any tools they think would improve their processes instead of being constrained to existing solutions. They also could just be showing it because someone with an @google.com has a paid account, but I don't know for sure :)
I would think that it also brings the advantage of having tried the actual product in their own ecosystem, Google have a good overall insight into it in case they want to buy it - not sure if this is actually the case though.
Great market fit, runners are the worst part of GitHub Actions so I'm really glad to see a product enter this space as a drop-in replacement. Will definitely check this out for my pipelines.
Hey founder of BuildJet here,
With BuildJet for GitHub Actions, you can get up to 64 vCPU as a GitHub Actions runner. We plug right into your existing setup and have a significantly higher per core performance compared to the native runner.
Incoming shameless plug; if you don’t have to handle the hosting runners, but still to reap the benefits of having proper hardware (close to the metal). Check out BuildJet for GitHub actions[1] - 2x the speed for half the price. Easy to install and easy to revert.
Nice wording with 'per core performance'. We had difficulties properly conveying this point in our product when comparing our CI runners[1] to GitHub Actions CI Runner. I will be using it in our next website update. Tack
BuildKite lets you run their CI agents on your own hardware. Much like self-hosted runner in GitHub Actions. BuildJet for GitHub Actions is a managed service, where we provide the hardware and manage it for you.
Yeah, you're right, there is a tool called act[1] that lets users test the GitHub Actions CI runs toward their local machine. The implementation looks very similar to GitHub Actions official runner, e.g use the identical provisioning scripts[2]. It is a very nice tool but serves a different purpose than us.
Regarding general testability with GitHub Actions, I'd recommend checking out the tmate action[3], which lets you debug your CI run with SSH.
The 4x faster came from our first attempt - writing a complete CI (UI + infrastructure). The performance improvements mainly came from good hardware, a more aggressive cache on dependencies, and a docker layer cache.
The 2x improvements is referring to our latest product BuildJet for GitHub Actions, which is a plug-in runner for your existing GitHub Action pipeline.
Hey!
I think our thesis of the product is that GitHub Actions is good, but not fast and we fix that. Personally, I've had to wait for CI to finish when wanting to run tests before hot-fixing something on production - a faster CI would've been great.
But that's not really 'broken' and needing to be 'fixed'.
Maybe a better marketing angle is that it's going to save people money since minutes used for CI is a cost? As a user I'm seeing this and saying 'well my github actions work just fine' and moving on.
JetKVM builds open-source KVM-over-IP hardware that lets you control any computer — BIOS and all — through your browser. After raising $6M on Kickstarter (the #3 most-backed tech project ever), we’re scaling production and software for tens of thousands of users.
We’re looking for a Senior Fullstack Engineer to work across our stack — Go, Node.js, React, and WebRTC — from backend APIs to low-level firmware integrations. You’ll shape architecture, improve video streaming and authentication, and ship features end-to-end in a small, fast-moving team. Open-source, async, and remote(CET+/-3).
Apply → https://jetkvm.com/careers