hostingvsWhisperLive---CPU
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| hosting | WhisperLive---CPU | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 27/100 | 64/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 3 in Video Hosting | #1 of 6 in Transcription |
| GitHub stars | 11 | 4 338 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +46 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 3 |
| Latest release | — | v0.10.0 · 7 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | JavaScript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
WhisperLive---CPU scores 64/100 against 27/100 for hosting, so it is the safer default.
WhisperLive---CPU ships more often: 3 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for hosting.
If you want the quickest setup, WhisperLive---CPU is easier to run; hosting needs more configuration.
WhisperLive---CPU is growing faster right now (+46 stars in 30 days).
hosting details →WhisperLive---CPU details →