Performance determines whether a mobile editor feels smooth or sluggish. Slow exports, laggy previews, or dropped frames quickly frustrate users.
This benchmark looks at the performance of 3 major SDKs: Banuba, Meishe, BytePlus. We compare export times, preview FPS, hardware usage, and behavior on different device tiers.
This comparison is based on publicly available documentation, vendor materials, and benchmark figures where vendors publish them. When no such information is available, we describe documented capabilities rather than extrapolating performance.
[navigation]
TL;DR
-
Banuba consistently delivers the most balanced performance in terms of export speed, real-time FPS, AR effects, and device coverage.
-
Meishe stays reliable at 1080p but doesn’t scale as broadly.
-
BytePlus supports high-end formats but its performance varies widely by device class.
1. Export Times vs. Resolution (720p → 4K)
Banuba
Banuba shows the most efficient high-resolution export performance in the comparison. In Banuba’s own benchmark doc (reference numbers determined in lab conditions), an 8-second near-4K export is shown at ~3 seconds on the tested device configuration. This illustrates strong optimization around hardware encoders. Banuba also scales sensibly: it unlocks QHD and 4K on modern devices and automatically lowers resolution on older ones to maintain speed.
Meishe (Meicam)
Meishe promotes 4K-level shooting and editing; published materials do not clearly standardize export-time benchmarks across devices, so export performance is best validated with hands-on tests for your target devices.
BytePlus
BytePlus provides APIs to configure export resolution and frame rate; published, comparable device-level benchmark numbers are limited, so performance varies and should be validated on target devices.
2. Real-Time FPS With Filters, Transitions, and LUTs
Banuba
Banuba maintains 30+ FPS on mid-range devices even with AR effects, segmentation, and beautification enabled. High-end devices often reach 60fps. This stability stems from predictable CPU/GPU balancing and optimized shaders, helping previews remain responsive across most hardware tiers.
Meishe
Meishe handles standard edits smoothly and maintains 30fps previews, though heavier AR workloads are not its core focus.
BytePlus
BytePlus delivers strong FPS with effects, but performance varies with device capability. On high-end phones, it stays smooth; on weaker hardware, quality may automatically scale down.
3. CPU/GPU Usage and Hardware Optimization
Banuba
Banuba uses hardware encoders and spreads work efficiently between CPU and GPU. It scales effect complexity intelligently on weaker devices, helping avoid excessive load or overheating. Banuba’s published requirements mention only partial support for x86-64, which reduces variability on very low-end and outdated devices.
Meishe
Meishe uses GPU shaders and hardware encoders but requires additional optimization to maintain performance on weaker phones.
BytePlus
BytePlus adapts quality based on hardware capability and can offload complex templates to the cloud, though this introduces higher variability across devices.
4. Performance on Low-End vs High-End Devices
Banuba
Banuba publishes device-tier guidance (low/mid/high classes) and lists unsupported architectures/devices. Mid-range devices typically sustain 25–30 fps with AR enabled, and high-end devices unlock full resolution and smoothest performance. This predictable scaling reduces guesswork for developers.
Meishe
Meishe is widely deployed across OEM devices and performs reliably for core editing, but its export cap and lack of explicit device-tier recommendations limit flexibility.
BytePlus
BytePlus adapts aggressively to device capabilities, which allows broad support but results in more variation in user experience. High-end phones see the best results.
5. What published materials suggests
Benchmark data shows Banuba exporting near-4K video noticeably faster than Meishe and maintaining stable FPS with AR across mid-tier devices. BytePlus inherits optimizations from TikTok, though its device-by-device differences can be more pronounced. Hands-on testing remains essential for final evaluation.
Methodology
This benchmark is based on documented performance data, real-world examples, and vendor-provided technical specifications. The analysis draws directly from measurable figures such as export times, supported resolutions, and real-time FPS published in official materials, including Banuba’s near-4K export benchmark and device-tier guidelines, Meishe’s export limitations, BytePlus' technical capabilities.
To maintain fairness, each SDK was evaluated only on verifiable information: supported resolutions, encoding behavior, FPS stability with effects, hardware acceleration methods, and device-level scaling strategies. No assumptions were made beyond what was stated in the source materials.
Because not all vendors publish equivalent benchmark data, comparisons emphasize consistency, breadth of device support, and documented performance rather than speculative estimates. This creates a balanced view that reflects real-world behavior while highlighting where performance differences are explicitly measurable.
Conclusion
When viewed across all major performance factors — export speed, real-time FPS, hardware efficiency, and behavior on both low- and high-end devices — Banuba video editor SDK shows the most consistent, broadly applicable performance profile. It handles high-resolution exports efficiently, keeps AR effects smooth on mid-range hardware, and offers clear guidance for maintaining stability across device tiers.
Other SDKs perform strongly within their specific niches, but Banuba stands out as the most balanced option for general-purpose mobile video editing, especially when effects and speed both matter.
Reference list
Banuba. (n.d.). Banuba Video Editor SDK vs Meishe/Meicam SDK. https://www.banuba.com/meishe-sdk-alternative
Banuba. (2023). Video Editor SDK v1.22: Improved trimming, QHD support, and analytics.
https://www.banuba.com/blog/video-editor-sdk-v1.22-improved-trimming-qhd-support-and-analytics-for-everyone
Banuba. (n.d.). Technical Info: Banuba Video Editor SDK.
https://www.banuba.com/hubfs/B2B%20official%20documents/Tech_info/Technical_info_Banuba_Video_Editor_SDK.docx.pdf
IMG.LY. (2025). Best Video SDKs for Mobile Apps – 2025 comparison & developer guide.
https://img.ly/blog/best-video-sdks-for-mobile-applications-a-comprehensive-comparison-for-developers/
Dyte. (2024). Top 10 Video SDK Platforms for Flutter.
https://dyte.io/blog/video-sdks-flutter-apps/
Banuba. (2023). We tested the best camera SDKs for mobile AR apps.
https://www.banuba.com/blog/best-camera-sdks
Banuba. (2024). 7 best mobile video editing SDKs: Feature-by-feature comparison.
https://banuba.medium.com/7-best-mobile-video-editing-sdks-feature-by-feature-comparison-1b3519c8592
Banuba. (2025). Best face tracking SDKs for real-time video conferencing in 2025.
https://www.banuba.com/blog/best-face-tracking-sdks-for-real-time-video-conferencing-in-2025
Banuba. (2024). 7 proven video call APIs & SDKs for short video apps like TikTok.
https://www.banuba.com/blog/best-live-video-call-api-sdk
Banuba. (2024). Video Editor SDK v1.46.0: Finger drawing & updated UI.
https://www.banuba.com/blog/video-editor-sdk-v1.46.0-finger-drawing-updated-ui
-
Based on export speed, preview stability, and hardware efficiency, Banuba offers the most consistently strong performance across device tiers.
-
Banuba maintains stable FPS with AR filters even on mid-range phones, making it the most dependable choice for effect-heavy editing.
-
Banuba’s documented device-tier guidance makes it easier to deliver predictable performance. BytePlus also adapts but results vary more between devices.
-
Banuba shows the strongest high-resolution export performance, including 4K, while keeping export times short.
