Garnet vs DragonflyDB
Both are alternatives to Redis. Here's how they stack up — verified facts, no spin.
Also searched as DragonflyDB vs Garnet — same comparison, one verdict.
Garnet is open source (MIT) and DragonflyDB is not (Business Source License 1.1 (source-available, converts to Apache-2.0 in time)) — so the real question is whether you want to own the in-memory data stores & caching stack or rent it.
Garnet
Microsoft Research's cache — MIT, and unusually fast under contention.
Garnet is a Redis-protocol cache store out of Microsoft Research, written in C#, and its published throughput under high client concurrency is striking — the workload where Redis's single-threaded design shows most. MIT licensed, around 12k stars, used inside Microsoft before release. It is the most permissively licensed serious option here. The caution is ecosystem: a .NET server is an unusual dependency for teams that are not already there, and it is the newest of these by some distance.
DragonflyDB
Redis-compatible, built for modern multi-core machines.
DragonflyDB is a ground-up reimplementation of the Redis and Memcached protocols designed for the hardware people actually run now: it scales across all cores rather than being effectively single-threaded, and reports substantially higher throughput per machine with lower memory use. Around 31k stars. That means fewer, smaller instances for the same load, which is a real cost line rather than a benchmark. The licence is Business Source License 1.1 — source-available, converting to Apache-2.0 after a delay — so it is not open source today and should not be described as such.
Side by side
10 points of comparison, every one read from a verified field. Green marks the side that wins a row outright. A dash means we do not hold that fact — never that it is zero.
| Garnet | DragonflyDB | |
|---|---|---|
| Sovereignty ScoreOur transparent 0–100 composite for data ownership and exit cost. | 92 | 70 |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Local-first data | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | Business Source License 1.1 (source-available, converts to Apache-2.0 in time) |
| Pricing | Free and open source. | Free to self-host within BSL terms. Dragonfly Cloud is paid. |
| RAM to run it wellThe figure that actually matters, not the vendor's minimum. | — | Working set + 20% — it is meaningfully more memory-efficient than Redis |
| Realistic running costWhat the box costs each month if you run it yourself. | — | $15–40/mo, and it does more per core than the Redis family |
| Setup timeHonest first-install estimate, not the marketing quickstart. | — | 30 minutes |
| Ongoing maintenanceThe part nobody budgets for. | — | Low. |
Garnet edges it on the Sovereignty Score, but the right pick depends on the trade-offs below.
Weighing both against staying on Redis? Is Redis free? What it actually costs →
Garnet
Strengths
- +MIT — the most permissive licence in this comparison
- +Exceptional throughput under high concurrency
- +Microsoft Research behind it, with real production use
- +Redis protocol compatible, so clients work unchanged
Trade-offs
- −Newest option here with the shortest track record
- −A .NET runtime dependency many teams will not want
- −Smaller community than Valkey or DragonflyDB
- −Not all Redis commands and data types are implemented
DragonflyDB
Strengths
- +Uses every core — far higher throughput per machine than Redis
- +Lower memory footprint for the same dataset
- +Speaks both Redis and Memcached protocols
- +Fewer, smaller instances for the same workload
Trade-offs
- −Business Source License — not open source today, whatever lists say
- −Cannot be offered as a competing managed service
- −Younger codebase with a shorter production record
- −Some rarely used Redis commands are unimplemented
Which one fits you
The trade-offs above, turned into a decision. Find the line that describes your team.
Choose Garnet
if you want the source and the option to fork it, and mIT — the most permissive licence in this comparison.
Choose DragonflyDB
if uses every core — far higher throughput per machine than Redis.
Neither, yet
if both carry a real cost you should weigh first — newest option here with the shortest track record, and business Source License — not open source today, whatever lists say. If either of those is a dealbreaker for your team, the shortlist is wrong rather than the choice.
What it takes to run these yourself
Real requirements and honest running costs, not the vendor quickstart.
Garnet vs DragonflyDB — common questions
Is Garnet a better fit than DragonflyDB for in-memory data stores & caching?
It depends on what you are optimising for, and the honest split is this: Garnet scores 92 to DragonflyDB's 70 on data ownership and exit cost, so it is the safer choice if you care about being able to leave. DragonflyDB earns its place on a different axis — uses every core — far higher throughput per machine than Redis. Neither is a wrong answer for every team; the table above is the actual comparison.
What happens if we want to switch later?
Garnet keeps its data local or in open formats, so leaving is an export rather than a negotiation. DragonflyDB is still self-hostable, so the files stay on your server either way — but it is not local-first by design, so check what its export produces before you rely on it.
Can I self-host Garnet or DragonflyDB?
Both can be self-hosted. The difference is what it costs you in time rather than whether it is possible — see the setup and maintenance rows above.
Are Garnet and DragonflyDB both alternatives to Redis?
Yes — both appear in our Redis comparison, which is why they are worth putting side by side. People usually arrive here already having decided to move off Redis and now choosing between the two replacements, which is a narrower and much easier question.
Related alternative guides
Facts verified 2026-08-05. Licenses and pricing change — spotted something out of date? That's a correction we want.