noVNC vs SoftEther VPN

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

Not the right match-up?
FeaturenoVNCSoftEther VPN
CategoryRemote Access & VPNRemote Access & VPN
LicenseMPL-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageJavaScriptC
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM64 MB256 MB
Deploymentbare-metal, docker, sourcebare-metal, binary
GitHub stars★ 13,911★ 13,447
First released20102014
ReplacesRealVNCCisco AnyConnect

Why pick each one

Choose noVNC if…

  • Released under the MPL-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 13.9k GitHub stars
noVNC details

Choose SoftEther VPN if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Mature project with 13.4k GitHub stars
  • Written in C
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
SoftEther VPN details

Frequently asked questions

Is noVNC or SoftEther VPN better?

noVNC is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider SoftEther VPN if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are noVNC and SoftEther VPN free and open-source?

Yes. noVNC is licensed under MPL-2.0 and SoftEther VPN under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run noVNC and SoftEther VPN with Docker?

noVNC: yes. SoftEther VPN: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons