Puter vs Sync-in

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?
FeaturePuterSync-in
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseAGPL-3.0AGPL-3.0-or-later
LanguageTypeScriptTypeScript
Setup difficultyMediumMedium
Min. RAM512 MB1,024 MB
Deploymentdockerbare-metal
GitHub stars★ 43,003★ 1,630
First released20262025
Replaces

Why pick each one

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

Choose Sync-in if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0-or-later license
  • Active community (1.6k GitHub stars)
  • Written in TypeScript
Sync-in details

Frequently asked questions

Is Puter or Sync-in better?

Neither is universally better. Puter has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Puter and Sync-in free and open-source?

Yes. Puter is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Sync-in under AGPL-3.0-or-later. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Puter and Sync-in with Docker?

Puter: yes. Sync-in: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons