# heplify vs llama.cpp

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

| | heplify | llama.cpp |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 49/100 | 93/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #27 of 48 in Network Monitoring | #2 of 25 in LLM Inference |
| GitHub stars | 222 | 132 743 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +3 288 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 11 | 1468 ✓ |
| Latest release | 2.0.28 · 4 Sept 2026 | b11982 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Go | C++ |

## Which one should you pick?

llama.cpp scores 93/100 against 49/100 for heplify, so it is the safer default.

llama.cpp ships more often: 1468 stable releases in the past year, against 11 for heplify.

If you want the quickest setup, llama.cpp is easier to run; heplify needs more configuration.

llama.cpp is growing faster right now (+3 288 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [heplify](https://selfhost.directory/project/heplify) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/heplify.md)
- [llama.cpp](https://selfhost.directory/project/llamacpp) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/llamacpp.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/heplify-vs-llamacpp