mediamtx vs SRS
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, ratings, and alternatives.
MediaMTX is a ready-to-use live media server and media proxy that allows users to read, publish, proxy, record, and playback real-time video and audio streams. It supports multiple protocols, including Media-over-QUIC, SRT, WebRTC, RTSP, RTMP, LL-HLS, MPEG-TS, and RTP.
SRS (Simple Realtime Server) is a high-efficiency open-source media server for live video. It ingests and delivers streams over RTMP, WebRTC, HLS, HTTP-FLV, HTTP-TS, SRT, MPEG-DASH and GB28181, with codec support for H.264, H.265, AV1, VP9, AAC, Opus and G.711. The server is highly configurable, clusters well for large audiences, and integrates with existing workflows through its broad protocol support.
- Supports multiple protocols for flexibility
- Allows for real-time video and audio streaming
- Can be used as a media server or media proxy
- Free and open-source
- Free and open‑source
- Supports a wide range of streaming protocols
- Low latency suitable for interactive use cases
- Active community support via GitHub and forums
- May require technical expertise to set up and configure
- Limited documentation and support resources
- May not be suitable for large-scale commercial use
- Requires manual self‑hosting and configuration
- Documentation can be fragmented for beginners
- Limited official commercial support options
More alternatives & similar tools
Alternatives to mediamtx
View all →Alternatives to SRS
View all →
The Verdict
AI-generated from listing dataBoth SRS and mediamtx are free, open‑source self‑hosted media servers, but SRS offers broader protocol coverage, clustering, and a larger community, while mediamtx provides a Go‑based codebase and additional QUIC support.
Key differences
- •Protocol breadth: SRS includes GB28181 and HTTP‑FLV; mediamtx adds Media‑over‑QUIC and LL‑HLS.
- •Clustering/load‑balancing: native in SRS, not mentioned for mediamtx.
- •Community size: SRS has 29,073 GitHub stars vs 19,756 for mediamtx.
- •Primary language: SRS is C++, mediamtx is Go, affecting developer familiarity.
- •Support channels: SRS offers a community forum; mediamtx lists email support.
Pricing & value
Both are free and open‑source, offering comparable cost‑free value.
Ease of use / learning curve
mediamtx’s Go codebase and simpler feature set may be easier for developers familiar with Go.
Features & depth
SRS supports more protocols (GB28181, HTTP‑FLV) and built‑in clustering, giving deeper streaming capabilities.
Integrations & ecosystem
SRS’s larger GitHub star count and active forum suggest a richer ecosystem and more third‑party integrations.
Collaboration
SRS provides both an HTTP API and Prometheus exporter, facilitating automation and monitoring.
Scalability
SRS explicitly includes load‑balancing and clustering for thousands of concurrent streams.
Support
SRS offers community forum plus GitHub Issues; mediamtx lists only email and GitHub issues, giving SRS a slight edge.
Choose mediamtx if…
Teams preferring Go, needing QUIC/LL‑HLS, or a simpler proxy‑focused server.
Choose SRS if…
Developers needing extensive protocol support, clustering, or Chinese surveillance integration.
Common questions
Is there any cost to use either server?
Both SRS and mediamtx are free and open‑source.
Which server scales better for thousands of concurrent viewers?
SRS includes built‑in load‑balancing and clustering, explicitly designed for high concurrency.
Do both servers support WebRTC?
Yes, both SRS and mediamtx list native WebRTC publishing and playback.