llama.cppvswraft
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| llama.cpp | wraft | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 | 44/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 25 in LLM Inference | #35 of 46 in Document Management |
| GitHub stars | 132 689 | 167 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +3 234 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 1463 | 3 |
| Latest release | b11977 · 29 Oct 2026 | v0.6.7 · 25 Sept 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | C++ | Elixir |
Which one should you pick?
llama.cpp scores 93/100 against 44/100 for wraft, so it is the safer default.
llama.cpp ships more often: 1463 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for wraft.
If you want the quickest setup, llama.cpp is easier to run; wraft needs more configuration.
llama.cpp is growing faster right now (+3 234 stars in 30 days).
llama.cpp details →wraft details →