e2bvsMCSManager
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| e2b | MCSManager | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 | 68/100 |
| Rank in category | #14 of 209 in AI Agents | #8 of 62 in Game Servers |
| GitHub stars | 14 593 | 5 005 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +655 | +35 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 73 | 20 |
| Latest release | @e2b/cli@2.23.0 · 28 Oct 2026 | v10.22.0 · 27 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
e2b scores 76/100 against 68/100 for MCSManager, so it is the safer default.
e2b ships more often: 73 stable releases in the past year, against 20 for MCSManager.
If you want the quickest setup, MCSManager is easier to run; e2b needs more configuration.
e2b is growing faster right now (+655 stars in 30 days).
e2b details →MCSManager details →