LiveKit 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?
LiveKit
Scalable WebRTC infrastructure for real-time audio and video
VS
MiroTalk SFU
Simple, secure, scalable real-time video conferences up to 4k,
| Feature | LiveKit | MiroTalk SFU |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Video Conferencing | Video Conferencing |
| License | Apache-2.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | JavaScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, binary | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 20,181 | ★ 3,080 |
| First released | 2021 | 2020 |
| Replaces | Twilio, Agora | — |
Why pick each one
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 LiveKit or MiroTalk SFU better?
Neither is universally better. LiveKit has the larger community, while MiroTalk SFU is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are LiveKit and MiroTalk SFU free and open-source?
Yes. LiveKit is licensed under Apache-2.0 and MiroTalk SFU under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run LiveKit and MiroTalk SFU with Docker?
LiveKit: yes. MiroTalk SFU: yes.