Jitsi Videobridge vs coturn
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted video conferencing options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Jitsi Videobridge
Scalable WebRTC-compatible video routing engine
VS
coturn
Open-source TURN and STUN server for WebRTC
| Feature | Jitsi Videobridge | coturn |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Video Conferencing | Video Conferencing |
| License | Apache-2.0 | BSD-3-Clause |
| Language | Kotlin | C |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | docker, bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,093 | ★ 14,274 |
| First released | 2013 | 2012 |
| Replaces | Zoom, Twilio | — |
Why pick each one
Choose Jitsi Videobridge if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3.1k GitHub stars)
- Written in Kotlin
Choose coturn if…
- Released under the BSD-3-Clause license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 14.3k GitHub stars
- Written in C
Frequently asked questions
Is Jitsi Videobridge or coturn better?
coturn is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider Jitsi Videobridge if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Jitsi Videobridge and coturn free and open-source?
Yes. Jitsi Videobridge is licensed under Apache-2.0 and coturn under BSD-3-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Jitsi Videobridge and coturn with Docker?
Jitsi Videobridge: yes. coturn: yes.