What Is the Qbox Framework? Qbox vs QBCore Explained

What Qbox actually is

Qbox is an open-source server framework for FiveM and RedM roleplay servers. A framework is the base layer that handles the things every roleplay server needs but that the base game does not provide: persistent player accounts and characters, money and bank balances, jobs and gangs, inventory, and a shared set of functions that every other script can call.

Qbox is maintained by the Qbox project on GitHub (github.com/Qbox-project) and is built as a fork of QBCore. A fork means the maintainers took the existing QBCore codebase, copied it, and then evolved it in a different direction while keeping much of the original structure and naming. That heritage matters: if you already know QBCore, most Qbox concepts will feel familiar, and many QBCore scripts can be made to run on Qbox with little or no change.

The core repository is qbx_core. Around it sits a set of official Qbox resources prefixed with qbx_, such as qbx_garages, qbx_vehicleshop, qbx_police, and qbx_properties. These replace the equivalent qb- resources from classic QBCore.

Why Qbox forked from QBCore

QBCore became the most popular free roleplay framework in FiveM, which is exactly why a fork happened. Popularity brought thousands of community scripts, but it also brought inconsistency. The QBCore organization grew large, maintenance was uneven across resources, and some core code carried years of legacy patterns that were hard to change without breaking servers.

A group of contributors wanted a stricter, more modern baseline. Rather than fight that battle inside the existing project, they forked it into Qbox. The goals were concrete:

• Move the foundation onto well-maintained shared libraries instead of bespoke helper code.
• Enforce consistent coding standards and review across official resources.
• Improve performance and reduce the resource monitor cost of common scripts.
• Provide clearer, documented APIs so script developers stop relying on internal globals that change without warning.

The practical result is that Qbox leans heavily on the Overextended ecosystem (overextended.dev), the same group behind ox_lib and ox_inventory.

The mechanism: how Qbox is built differently

The difference between Qbox and classic QBCore is mostly in the plumbing, not the player experience.

It standardizes on Overextended resources

Classic QBCore shipped its own inventory, its own UI helpers, and its own database wrapper. Qbox instead builds on shared dependencies:

• ox_lib provides shared Lua and JavaScript utilities: context menus, input dialogs, notifications, callbacks, zones, and caching. Scripts call one well-documented library instead of reinventing menus.
• ox_inventory is the default inventory. It is slot and weight based, handles item metadata, stashes, shops, and weapons, and is far cheaper on the server tick than older inventories.
• oxmysql is the database layer. It is the standard MySQL wrapper most modern FiveM resources already expect.

Because these are the same dependencies many other modern resources use, Qbox servers tend to have a cleaner dependency tree instead of three competing inventory systems fighting each other.

It keeps a QBCore-style API for compatibility

Qbox knows its main audience is people coming from QBCore. So it exposes the framework through familiar entry points. You can still get the core object and call player methods, and Qbox provides a compatibility layer (often referred to through qbx_core exports and a QB-style bridge) so that scripts written for QBCore can resolve against Qbox.

In practice this means a qb- script that calls exports['qb-core']:GetCoreObject() and reads Player.PlayerData.job can frequently be pointed at Qbox with a bridge resource, rather than rewritten from scratch. It is not magic and not every script works untouched, especially ones that hard-depend on the old qb-inventory, but the migration surface is much smaller than moving from, say, ESX to QBCore.

It modernizes the codebase

Qbox official resources favor current Lua patterns, typed and documented exports, and statebags or ox_lib callbacks instead of brittle event spam. The aim is fewer surprises for developers and lower CPU cost in the resource monitor during a full server.

A concrete example

Imagine you run a QBCore server and your players complain that opening the inventory stutters when the server is full, and your custom job script breaks every time you update qb-core.

On Qbox, the inventory is ox_inventory, which is well optimized and actively maintained, so the stutter problem largely goes away. Your job script, if it was written against the QBCore API, can usually be loaded behind the Qbox bridge with minor edits. New scripts you write call ox_lib for the menu and input, ox_inventory exports to add or remove items, and qbx_core exports to read the player's job and money. Everything points at the same small set of documented dependencies instead of a tangle of one-off helpers.

That is the whole pitch: same roleplay feature set, sturdier and more consistent foundation.

Who should use Qbox

Qbox is a strong default if any of these describe you:

• You are starting a new QB-style roleplay server in 2026 and want a modern base rather than inheriting legacy QBCore baggage.
• You already run QBCore, you are frustrated by inconsistent maintenance, and you are comfortable doing a planned migration.
• You want to standardize on ox_inventory and ox_lib because most quality paid and free scripts already target them.
• You have at least a developer or a capable owner who can read documentation, because Qbox assumes some technical literacy.

Qbox is probably not the right pick if:

• You depend on a large library of old qb- scripts that hard-require qb-inventory and you cannot afford to test or replace them.
• You want to buy a prebuilt server with zero configuration and never touch code. Any framework will fight you there, but Qbox in particular rewards owners who understand its dependency model.
• Your community already runs a stable ESX build and the team has no appetite to relearn a different API.

Where Qbox sits next to QBCore and ESX

ESX is the older, very widely used framework with the largest pool of legacy scripts and a different API style. QBCore is the framework Qbox forked from and remains hugely popular with an enormous script catalog. Qbox is the modern, standards-focused descendant of QBCore.

Think of it as a spectrum of tradeoffs. ESX gives you the deepest catalog and the most tutorials but the most dated patterns. QBCore gives you a massive script ecosystem and broad familiarity. Qbox gives you the cleanest modern foundation and the best alignment with the Overextended toolchain, at the cost of a smaller (but rapidly growing) pool of purpose-built scripts and an expectation that you can follow documentation.

There is no single correct answer. The right framework depends on your existing scripts, your team's skill, and whether you value catalog size or a clean foundation more.

How to evaluate Qbox without committing your live server

The safe path is to spin up a separate test server. Install qbx_core, ox_lib, ox_inventory, and oxmysql, import the SQL, and bring up a clean character. Then load one or two of your important scripts behind the bridge and see what breaks. You will learn more in an afternoon of testing than from any comparison article, including this one.