OctoPrint vs Puter

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

Not the right match-up?
FeatureOctoPrintPuter
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicensefreeAGPL-3.0
LanguagePythonTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, one-clickdocker
GitHub stars★ 9,062★ 43,003
First released20222026
Replaces

Why pick each one

Choose OctoPrint if…

  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • One-click install on common self-host platforms
  • Mature project with 9.1k GitHub stars
OctoPrint details

Choose Puter if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 43k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Puter details

Frequently asked questions

Is OctoPrint or Puter better?

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

Are OctoPrint and Puter free and open-source?

Yes. OctoPrint is licensed under free and Puter under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run OctoPrint and Puter with Docker?

OctoPrint: yes. Puter: yes.

Related comparisons