# MediaMTX vs Tube Archivist

> Two self-hosted [Media Server projects](https://selfhost.directory/media-server), compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | MediaMTX | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 79/100 ✓ | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 118 in Media Server | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 20 540 ✓ | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +288 ✓ | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 18 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v1.21.3 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

MediaMTX scores 79/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.

MediaMTX ships more often: 18 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

If you want the quickest setup, MediaMTX is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.

MediaMTX is growing faster right now (+288 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [MediaMTX](https://selfhost.directory/project/mediamtx) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/mediamtx.md)
- [Tube Archivist](https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/mediamtx-vs-tube-archivist