llama.cppvsMikroDash
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| llama.cpp | MikroDash | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 | 49/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 25 in LLM Inference | #27 of 48 in Network Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 132 728 | 633 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +3 273 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 1468 | 10 |
| Latest release | b11982 · 29 Oct 2026 | v0.8.77 · 23 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | C++ | Go |
Which one should you pick?
llama.cpp scores 93/100 against 49/100 for MikroDash, so it is the safer default.
llama.cpp ships more often: 1468 stable releases in the past year, against 10 for MikroDash.
If you want the quickest setup, MikroDash is easier to run; llama.cpp needs more configuration.
llama.cpp is growing faster right now (+3 273 stars in 30 days).
llama.cpp details →MikroDash details →