# llama.cpp vs RapidForge

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

| | llama.cpp | RapidForge |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 ✓ | 37/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 25 in LLM Inference | #27 of 32 in Workflow Automation |
| GitHub stars | 132 669 ✓ | 44 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +3 312 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 1461 ✓ | 2 |
| Latest release | b11972 · 28 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.15.0 · 2 Jul 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Main language | C++ | JavaScript |

## Which one should you pick?

llama.cpp scores 93/100 against 37/100 for RapidForge, so it is the safer default.

llama.cpp ships more often: 1461 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for RapidForge.

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

llama.cpp is growing faster right now (+3 312 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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