Janus vs MiroTalk SFU
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?
Janus
General-purpose, lightweight, minimalist WebRTC Server
VS
MiroTalk SFU
Simple, secure, scalable real-time video conferences up to 4k,
| Feature | Janus | MiroTalk SFU |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Video Conferencing | Video Conferencing |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | C | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 9,144 | ★ 3,080 |
| First released | 2020 | 2020 |
| Replaces | — | — |
Why pick each one
Choose Janus if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Mature project with 9.1k GitHub stars
- Written in C
- Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
Choose MiroTalk SFU if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (3.1k GitHub stars)
- Written in JavaScript
Frequently asked questions
Is Janus or MiroTalk SFU better?
Neither is universally better. Janus has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Janus and MiroTalk SFU free and open-source?
Yes. Janus is licensed under GPL-3.0 and MiroTalk SFU under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Janus and MiroTalk SFU with Docker?
Janus: check the project docs for container support. MiroTalk SFU: yes.