head to head · open source

zinx vs goworld

zinx has 7,765 GitHub stars, 1,262 forks, 96 open issues and last shipped 4 months ago. goworld has 2,718 stars, 474 forks, 27 open issues and last shipped 10 months ago. zinx leads on adoption by 186% (7,765 vs 2,718 stars). zinx is written in Go under MIT; goworld is written in Go under Apache-2.0. zinx has attracted 16% as many forks as stars, goworld 17%. zinx was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (game-server, golang), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

zinx ★ 7.8K goworld ★ 2.7K category Miscellaneous

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

zinx goworld
GitHub stars ★ 7.8K ★ 2.7K
License MIT Apache-2.0
Written in Go Go
Last push 2026-06-06 2025-11-14
Forks ⑂ 1.3K ⑂ 474
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick zinx if

  • You weight community size — 7.8K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full zinx profile →

pick goworld if

  • You want the goworld feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You evaluated both and goworld fits your workflow better

full goworld profile →

About zinx

Zinx is a lightweight concurrent server framework written in Go, aimed at developers who want a small, readable TCP server skeleton they can study and customise rather than adopt a large opaque application framework.

read the full zinx overview →

About goworld

GoWorld is an Apache 2.0 licensed, scalable distributed game server engine written in Go, with hot swapping of game logic, aimed at developers and studios that run persistent multiplayer game worlds.

read the full goworld overview →

More in Miscellaneous

firecrawl ★ 183K Godot ★ 118K three.js ★ 116K ant-design ★ 100K open-design ★ 98K manim ★ 94K

Related comparisons

firecrawl vs godot godot vs three-js firecrawl vs gdevelop firecrawl vs monogame godot vs imgui three-js vs imgui firecrawl vs sbox godot vs bevy firecrawl vs playwright firecrawl vs crawl4ai firecrawl vs novu firecrawl vs searxng firecrawl vs postiz firecrawl vs cap firecrawl vs openseo firecrawl vs keploy firecrawl vs home-assistant godot vs home-assistant three-js vs home-assistant firecrawl vs cratedb firecrawl vs gladys-assistant home-assistant vs opencut home-assistant vs frigate godot vs cratedb

More Gaming projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Gaming field.

zinx vs Godot zinx vs three.js zinx vs imgui zinx vs bevy zinx vs raylib zinx vs GDevelop zinx vs Babylon.js zinx vs libgdx zinx vs aframe zinx vs OpenRA zinx vs engine zinx vs MonoGame

Frequently asked questions

Is zinx or goworld more popular?

zinx has 7,765 GitHub stars and goworld has 2,718. zinx has the larger community by that measure.

Are zinx and goworld free?

Both are open source. zinx is licensed under MIT and goworld under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between zinx and goworld?

zinx is written in Go and goworld in Go. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, zinx or goworld?

Choose zinx if you want the larger community (7,765 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose goworld if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.