Tracker comparison · FastTrack vs TrackTrack
FastTrack vs TrackTrack
A head-to-head of FastTrack and TrackTrack for multi-object tracking behind YOLO: how fast each runs across 10 NVIDIA GPUs and how steadily it holds object IDs, measured on the same clip and the same detector.
The verdict: On an NVIDIA H100, FastTrack is the quicker of the two at 104 FPS versus 14 for TrackTrack, roughly 7.3× its throughput, and it stays out front on all 10 GPU tiers. TrackTrack is the steadier tracker: 4 ID fragmentations against 24 for FastTrack (83% fewer), across 7 unique IDs to 12 on the same clip. For the FastTrack-vs-TrackTrack decision that's the trade-off in a nutshell: FastTrack for teams that want high FPS without ByteTrack's occasional ID churn, TrackTrack for offline / batch analysis where ID correctness is paramount.
Higher FPS on 10 of the 10 GPU tiers tested.
Only 4 ID fragmentations, versus 24 for FastTrack.
ID-stability: what a fragmentation actually looks like
How well a tracker holds a single, consistent ID on each object is a property of the algorithm, not the GPU, so these numbers barely move across hardware; we report them once (measured on the NVIDIA H100). This clip has no MOT ground truth, so instead of MOTA/IDF1 we report the raw stability signals: how many distinct IDs the tracker created, how many times a track was broken (fragmentations), and the average track length. Fewer IDs and fewer fragmentations mean steadier identities.
| Tracker | Approach | Unique IDs | Fragmentations | Avg track length |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TrackTrack | Motion + Re-ID | 7 | 4 | 67.4 |
| FastTrack | Motion + Re-ID | 12 | 24 | 83.8 |
Speed by GPU
FastTrack and TrackTrack, ranked fastest-first. Pick any GPU to see which one leads on that hardware. End-to-end detection + tracking throughput (frames per second, higher is better) for FastTrack and TrackTrack across all 10 GPU tiers. GPUs are ordered flagship-first.
- FastTrack
- TrackTrack
Tip: Bold marks the faster tracker on each GPU. Measured with yolo26n.pt on a 200-frame clip.
| Tracker | B200 | H200 | H100 | RTX PRO 6000 | A100 80GB | A100 40GB | L40S | A10 | L4 | T4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FastTrack | 101.3 | 78.9 | 103.9 | 146.7 | 61.7 | 67.2 | 70.3 | 76.0 | 73.2 | 61.1 |
| TrackTrack | 14.9 | 11.1 | 14.2 | 21.7 | 11.3 | 12.5 | 13.0 | 10.5 | 13.3 | 9.1 |
FastTrack vs TrackTrack: the four questions that decide it
Every figure below is computed from the same run as the tables above: throughput, per-frame latency, cost and track continuity for this pair specifically, rather than a general ranking.
Real-time headroom
Across the 10 tiers, FastTrack clears 30 FPS on 10 and 60 FPS on 10; TrackTrack clears 30 FPS on 0 and 60 FPS on 0. TrackTrack does not reach 30 FPS on any tier in this run, which puts it in the offline-analysis bracket rather than the live-video one. Per frame on an NVIDIA H100 that is 9.6 ms for FastTrack and 70.6 ms for TrackTrack, detection included.
Does the ranking hold across GPUs?
Yes. FastTrack is ahead of TrackTrack on all 10 tiers, from the B200 down to the T4, so the ordering you see on an NVIDIA H100 is the ordering you will get on whatever you deploy to. That consistency is itself useful: it means this choice can be made once rather than revisited per hardware refresh.
How long an identity survives
Average track length was 83.8 frames for FastTrack and 67.4 for TrackTrack on the 200-frame clip, so FastTrack held each object for longer before losing or re-numbering it. Read alongside the fragmentation counts, that is what an ID switch feels like downstream: a counting line double-counts the same person, or a dwell-time average collapses because one visit was recorded as three. Neither number is MOTA, because this clip has no ground truth, but both come from the same run and point the same way.
Cost to run
At NVIDIA H100 rates, FastTrack costs $0.0106 per 1,000 frames against $0.0775 for TrackTrack, about 7.3× cheaper. Over a single 30 FPS camera running for an hour that is roughly $1.14 versus $8.37. That is small per camera, and a real multiplier across a wall of them. Cost here is pure occupancy: a slower tracker holds the GPU for longer, so throughput and spend are the same fact in two units.
Choosing between them
Choose FastTrack if…
Teams that want high FPS without ByteTrack's occasional ID churn.
Strengths
- Top-tier FPS on most GPUs
- Very stable IDs (few fragmentations)
- Strong all-round default
Trade-offs
- Newer, smaller community than ByteTrack/BoT-SORT
- Appearance step adds a little overhead vs pure motion
Motion + Re-ID, 2024. Enable it with tracker="fasttrack.yaml".
Choose TrackTrack if…
Offline / batch analysis where ID correctness is paramount.
Strengths
- Fewest fragmentations of any tracker
- Most consistent identities
- State-of-the-art association
Trade-offs
- Much slower, not for real time
- Heaviest tracker to run
Motion + Re-ID, 2025. Enable it with tracker="tracktrack.yaml".
Other head-to-head comparisons
More matchups involving FastTrack and TrackTrack, each with the same speed, cost and ID-stability breakdown.
How these numbers were measured
FastTrack and TrackTrack ran on the identical 200-frame clip with the same yolo26n.pt detector on each of the 10 GPU tiers, so the only variable is the tracker. There is no MOT ground truth on this clip, so no MOTA or IDF1 is claimed; the stability figures are raw counts. Full methodology and the benchmark script live on the hub, alongside all six trackers.
From the blog
Tutorials, code, and notes on computer vision, deep learning, and applied AI.
Object TrackingJuly 18, 20268 min readHow to use ByteTrack with YOLO for object tracking in Python
Object TrackingJune 27, 202613 min readUltralytics object trackers comparison: ByteTrack, BoT-SORT & More
YOLO26June 25, 202610 min readObject tracking and trajectory forecasting with YOLO26 and ByteTrack
YOLO11June 24, 20265 min readReal time bird detection and tracking using YOLO11
YOLO26June 23, 202612 min readHow to count people in zones with YOLO26 and OpenCV
Frequently asked questions
- Is FastTrack faster than TrackTrack?
- On an NVIDIA H100 with yolo26n.pt, FastTrack ran at 104 FPS and TrackTrack at 14 FPS end to end, detection included. Across all 10 GPU tiers FastTrack was ahead on 10 and TrackTrack on 0. The ordering is the same on every tier tested.
- Which holds object IDs better, FastTrack or TrackTrack?
- TrackTrack. On the same clip it recorded 4 ID fragmentations against 24, across 12 unique IDs for FastTrack and 7 for TrackTrack, with average track lengths of 83.8 and 67.4 frames. ID stability is a property of the algorithm rather than the GPU, so this holds on any hardware.
- Is FastTrack or TrackTrack cheaper to run?
- FastTrack, at $0.0106 per 1,000 frames on an NVIDIA H100 versus $0.0775. The difference is occupancy: the slower tracker holds the GPU longer per frame, so the cost gap tracks the speed gap.
- Can FastTrack and TrackTrack run in real time?
- FastTrack sustained 30 FPS or better on 10 of the 10 GPU tiers and TrackTrack on 0. Per frame on an NVIDIA H100 that is 9.6 ms and 70.6 ms respectively. Anything under 33 ms per frame keeps up with a 30 FPS camera.
- Should I choose FastTrack or TrackTrack?
- Choose FastTrack for teams that want high FPS without ByteTrack's occasional ID churn. Choose TrackTrack for offline / batch analysis where ID correctness is paramount. Near-ByteTrack speed with much steadier IDs. Research-grade stability, the fewest ID breaks of all.
- Does a more expensive GPU make tracking more accurate?
- No. A faster GPU only makes tracking run faster; it does not change how accurately the tracker follows objects. Accuracy and ID-stability depend on the tracking algorithm and your detector, not the hardware. That is why this page reports speed per GPU, but ID-stability only once.
- How was this YOLO tracker benchmark run?
- Every tracker ran on the same 200-frame clip with the same yolo26n.pt detector, on each of the 10 GPU tiers. FPS is the end-to-end detection-plus-tracking rate. All six trackers are built into Ultralytics, so results are reproducible with a single script.