# e2b vs MediaMTX

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | e2b | MediaMTX |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 | 79/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #15 of 209 in AI Agents | #3 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 14 606 | 20 542 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +648 ✓ | +290 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 76 ✓ | 18 |
| Latest release | @e2b/code-interpreter-python@2.11.6 · 28 Oct 2026 ✓ | v1.21.3 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Go |

## Which one should you pick?

MediaMTX scores 79/100 against 76/100 for e2b, so it is the safer default.

e2b ships more often: 76 stable releases in the past year, against 18 for MediaMTX.

If you want the quickest setup, MediaMTX is easier to run; e2b needs more configuration.

e2b is growing faster right now (+648 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [e2b](https://selfhost.directory/project/e2b) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/e2b.md)
- [MediaMTX](https://selfhost.directory/project/mediamtx) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mediamtx.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/e2b-vs-mediamtx