Tiledesk vs Zammad
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Tiledesk
Open-source conversational customer support platform
VS
Zammad
Web-based helpdesk and customer support system
| Feature | Tiledesk | Zammad |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Helpdesk & Ticketing | Chat & Communication |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Mustache | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 4,096 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 316 | ★ 5,834 |
| First released | 2020 | 2016 |
| Replaces | Zendesk, Intercom | Zendesk, Freshdesk |
Why pick each one
Choose Tiledesk if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Written in Mustache
Frequently asked questions
Is Tiledesk or Zammad better?
Neither is universally better. Zammad has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Tiledesk and Zammad free and open-source?
Yes. Tiledesk is licensed under MIT and Zammad under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Tiledesk and Zammad with Docker?
Tiledesk: yes. Zammad: yes.