llama.cppvsPulse
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| llama.cpp | Pulse | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 | 71/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 25 in LLM Inference | #2 of 19 in Infrastructure Monitoring |
| GitHub stars | 132 646 | 6 970 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +3 289 | +229 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 1457 | 43 |
| Latest release | b11968 · 28 Oct 2026 | helm-chart-6.6.0 · 25 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 71/100 for Pulse, so it is the safer default.
llama.cpp ships more often: 1457 stable releases in the past year, against 43 for Pulse.
If you want the quickest setup, Pulse is easier to run; llama.cpp needs more configuration.
llama.cpp is growing faster right now (+3 289 stars in 30 days).
llama.cpp details →Pulse details →