Conserve Backup vs Tarsnap GUI

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureConserve BackupTarsnap GUI
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-2.0BSD-2-Clause
LanguageRustC++
Setup difficultyMediumEasy
Min. RAM128 MB128 MB
Deploymentbinary, bare-metalbinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 278★ 250
First released20152016
ReplacesBackblazeBackblaze

Why pick each one

Choose Conserve Backup if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Written in Rust
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Conserve Backup details

Choose Tarsnap GUI if…

  • Released under the BSD-2-Clause license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Written in C++
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Tarsnap GUI details

Frequently asked questions

Is Conserve Backup or Tarsnap GUI better?

Neither is universally better. Conserve Backup has the larger community, while Tarsnap GUI is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Conserve Backup and Tarsnap GUI free and open-source?

Yes. Conserve Backup is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Tarsnap GUI under BSD-2-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Conserve Backup and Tarsnap GUI with Docker?

Conserve Backup: check the project docs for container support. Tarsnap GUI: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons