# llama.cpp vs Pulse

> 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).

## Details

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

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