SRS vs Tube Archivist

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted media servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureSRSTube Archivist
CategoryMedia ServersMedia Servers
LicenseMITGPL-3.0
LanguageC++Python
Setup difficultyMediumMedium
Min. RAM512 MB2,048 MB
Deploymentdockerdocker
GitHub stars★ 29,105★ 8,342
First released20252021
ReplacesYouTube

Why pick each one

Choose SRS if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Mature project with 29.1k GitHub stars
  • Written in C++
SRS details

Choose Tube Archivist if…

  • Great for archiving channels
  • Powerful search
Tube Archivist details

Frequently asked questions

Is SRS or Tube Archivist better?

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

Are SRS and Tube Archivist free and open-source?

Yes. SRS is licensed under MIT and Tube Archivist under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run SRS and Tube Archivist with Docker?

SRS: yes. Tube Archivist: yes.

Related comparisons