Janus vs MiroTalk P2P vs MiroTalk SFU

All three are free, self-hosted, open-source WebRTC tools for teams that want to avoid dependence on Zoom, Meet, or Teams, but they sit at different layers of…

Janus

Open Source · From Free

Best for: Engineering teams that want to build a fully custom video, live-streaming, or SIP-telephony product on top of a proven, modular, low-level WebRTC gateway rather than deploy a finished app.

MiroTalk P2P

Open Source · From Free

Best for: Small teams and privacy-focused users who want a free, ready-to-use self-hosted video app for small-group calls, roughly two to eight participants, with the lowest possible latency since media never touches a relay server.

MiroTalk SFU

Open Source · From Free

Best for: Organizations that need a turnkey, self-hosted alternative to Zoom or Meet for larger meetings, webinars, or streamed events with unlimited participants and extras like RTMP broadcast and AI avatars.

At a Glance

 JanusMiroTalk P2PMiroTalk SFU
Primary categoryVideo ConferencingVideo ConferencingVideo Conferencing
RatingNot documentedNot documentedNot documented
Pricing modelOpen SourceOpen SourceOpen Source
Starting priceFreeFreeFree
Free planNot documentedNot documentedNot documented
Free trialNot documentedNot documentedNot documented
PlatformsNot documentedWebWeb
Team collaborationNot documentedNot documentedNot documented
AI featuresNot documentedYesYes
Public APIYesYesYes

Standout Differences

Janus is infrastructure, not a finished app

Janus exposes a low-level, plugin-based WebRTC core (VideoRoom SFU, AudioBridge, Streaming, Recordplay, SIP) with a JSON signaling API, and developers write their own client and often server logic around it to assemble a finished product, unlike the MiroTalk editions which ship a complete browser UI ready to use.

Janus

MiroTalk P2P trades scale for latency and simplicity

By connecting participants directly to each other instead of routing through a relay server, MiroTalk P2P minimizes latency and keeps call media off any central server, but performance degrades as more people join, so the project itself recommends it only for small groups of roughly two to eight participants.

MiroTalk P2P

MiroTalk SFU is built for bigger, richer meetings

MiroTalk SFU replaces peer-to-peer transport with a mediasoup-based Selective Forwarding Unit, removing the small-group ceiling and adding RTMP streaming, virtual backgrounds, ChatGPT integration, and AI avatars that neither Janus nor MiroTalk P2P document.

MiroTalk SFU

The two MiroTalk editions share one codebase and UI

MiroTalk P2P and MiroTalk SFU come from the same creator and offer the same browser-based interface, whiteboard, chat, screen sharing up to 8K/60fps, and recording, so switching between them is mainly a question of which transport architecture fits your expected room sizes.

MiroTalk P2P, MiroTalk SFU

Janus's native SIP gateway is a differentiator

Janus ships an official SIP plugin that bridges WebRTC clients to traditional SIP telephony, a capability that lets a browser place and receive calls through a standard SIP provider and that is not documented for either MiroTalk edition.

Janus

Feature-by-Feature

Architecture and Scaling

FeatureJanusMiroTalk P2PMiroTalk SFU
Turnkey video conferencing UI ready to deployUnavailableAvailableAvailable
Peer-to-peer transport for small, low-latency callsNot documentedAvailableUnavailable
SFU relay architecture for unlimited/large-group scalingAvailableUnavailableAvailable

Protocol and Integration

FeatureJanusMiroTalk P2PMiroTalk SFU
SIP telephony bridgingAvailableNot documentedNot documented
RTMP live broadcast streamingAvailableNot documentedAvailable
AI avatars and ChatGPT integrationNot documentedNot documentedAvailable

Licensing and Support

FeatureJanusMiroTalk P2PMiroTalk SFU
Free, self-hosted open-source coreAvailableAvailableAvailable
Commercial support or alternative licensing optionAvailableUnavailableAvailable

Pricing Compared

Starting price reflects the lowest paid tier, not the full cost for every team size or usage level.

Janus

Self-Hosted (Open Source) — Free N/A
Meetecho Commercial Support — Custom pricing contract

MiroTalk P2P

Open Source (Self-Hosted) — Free N/A

MiroTalk SFU

Open Source (Self-Hosted) — Free N/A
Commercial License — One-time fee (around $99 via marketplace listings) One-time

Pros & Cons

Janus

Pros

  • Completely free and open source with no usage-based fees
  • Modular plugin system gives developers granular control over functionality
  • Native SIP gateway support that many competing SFUs lack
  • Long production track record and active maintenance by its original authors
  • Commercial support available directly from Meetecho when needed

Cons

  • Requires significant developer effort to build a finished product on top of it
  • No official managed cloud hosting option from Meetecho
  • Lower-level API means a steeper learning curve than fully managed video SDKs
  • Documentation, while solid, assumes real-time media and networking expertise
  • Scaling and operating in production requires WebRTC infrastructure knowledge

MiroTalk P2P

Pros

  • Free and open source under AGPLv3
  • Low-latency peer-to-peer calls with no central media server
  • Rich built-in toolset: whiteboard, chat, screen share, recording
  • No installation or account needed to join a call
  • Full data control when self-hosted

Cons

  • Peer-to-peer architecture scales poorly beyond small groups compared to SFU-based tools
  • No official managed hosting or enterprise SLA from the core project
  • Requires server setup and maintenance knowledge to self-host
  • Community-driven support rather than dedicated customer service
  • Large groups should use MiroTalk SFU instead, adding a decision step for new users

MiroTalk SFU

Pros

  • Scales to unlimited participants far better than peer-to-peer video tools
  • Free and open source under AGPLv3, with an optional commercial license for alternative terms
  • Rich feature set including RTMP streaming, AI avatars, and ChatGPT integration
  • No download or login required for participants to join
  • Full data ownership and no vendor lock-in when self-hosted

Cons

  • Self-hosting an SFU server requires more technical setup and server resources than the P2P edition
  • No official managed cloud SaaS offering from the core open-source project
  • Community-based support rather than guaranteed enterprise SLAs
  • Advanced features like AI avatars and ChatGPT integration may require additional configuration or API keys
  • Running large meetings reliably depends on adequately provisioned server infrastructure

Use Cases

Choose Janus: Engineering teams that want to build a fully custom video, live-streaming, or SIP-telephony product on top of a proven, modular, low-level WebRTC gateway rather than deploy a finished app.
Choose MiroTalk P2P: Small teams and privacy-focused users who want a free, ready-to-use self-hosted video app for small-group calls, roughly two to eight participants, with the lowest possible latency since media never touches a relay server.
Choose MiroTalk SFU: Organizations that need a turnkey, self-hosted alternative to Zoom or Meet for larger meetings, webinars, or streamed events with unlimited participants and extras like RTMP broadcast and AI avatars.

Janus

  • Custom video conferencing platforms — Companies use Janus's VideoRoom plugin as the SFU foundation for building their own branded conferencing products.
  • Live streaming and webinars — Organizations use Janus's Streaming plugin to broadcast one-to-many live video for events or education.
  • SIP-to-WebRTC bridging — Telecom and enterprise teams use Janus's SIP plugin to let browser-based clients call into existing telephony systems.

MiroTalk P2P

  • Small team meetings — Teams that want a free, self-hosted Zoom alternative for quick calls with chat and screen sharing.
  • Client presentations — Consultants and freelancers sharing screens and whiteboards with a small number of clients.
  • Privacy-focused organizations — Groups that need full control over where call data is processed and stored by self-hosting their own instance.

MiroTalk SFU

  • Webinars and online classes — Educators and businesses hosting larger group sessions that exceed what peer-to-peer tools can handle.
  • Company-wide meetings — Organizations needing a scalable, self-hosted alternative to commercial video conferencing platforms.
  • Live broadcasting — Streamers or organizations using RTMP output to broadcast meetings to external platforms.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core difference between Janus and the two MiroTalk editions?

Janus is a low-level, plugin-based WebRTC gateway that developers use to build custom video, streaming, or telephony applications, while MiroTalk P2P and MiroTalk SFU are complete, ready-to-use self-hosted video conferencing apps with a browser interface already built for you.

When should I choose MiroTalk P2P over MiroTalk SFU?

MiroTalk P2P fits small groups of roughly two to eight participants where you want the lowest latency and no media passing through a relay server. Once you need larger meetings, webinars, or features like RTMP streaming and AI avatars, MiroTalk SFU's mediasoup-based architecture is the better fit.

Does Janus include a ready-made video conferencing interface?

No. Janus provides the WebRTC core and official plugins such as VideoRoom, AudioBridge, and SIP, but application-specific logic and the user interface are left to the developer to build on top of it.

Can I get commercial support for any of these tools?

Yes for two of the three. Meetecho, the team behind Janus, offers consulting, custom plugin development, and support contracts, and MiroTalk SFU has an optional one-time-fee commercial license sold through marketplaces for organizations that want terms outside AGPLv3. MiroTalk P2P has no official paid tier.

Are these tools really free to self-host?

Yes. Janus is released under the GPL and both MiroTalk editions under AGPLv3, so all three can be self-hosted at no licensing cost; you only pay for your own server infrastructure unless you opt into Meetecho's paid support or MiroTalk SFU's optional commercial license.

Does MiroTalk SFU support live streaming and AI features that MiroTalk P2P lacks?

Yes. MiroTalk SFU documents RTMP streaming to external platforms, virtual backgrounds, ChatGPT integration, and AI avatars, none of which are documented for MiroTalk P2P, reflecting SFU's focus on larger, richer meetings and broadcasts.

Read the full Janus review · Read the full MiroTalk P2P review · Read the full MiroTalk SFU review