When you're building AI agents that need real-time communication, the question of LiveKit vs Agora pricing becomes more than just comparing numbers on a spreadsheet. Think of it like choosing between building your own house or buying one that's move-in ready.
LiveKit gives you the pay-as-you-go flexibility that works great when you're starting small, but you'll need to roll up your sleeves for setup and ongoing DevOps maintenance.
Agora takes a different approach with tiered pricing that might make you wince at first, but the managed infrastructure means you can skip the technical headaches and launch faster.
Here's where the math gets interesting: running a basic AI deployment with 10,000 minutes of daily usage will set you back roughly $14,600 annually with LiveKit, while Agora comes in at about $36,500 per year.
That price gap looks significant until you factor in what you're actually getting. LiveKit hands you complete control and freedom from vendor lock-in, perfect if you have the technical chops and want to customize everything. Agora speeds up your time to market because someone else handles the infrastructure puzzle pieces. The real decision comes down to more than upfront costs, though.
You'll want to think about how your usage might grow, who's managing your infrastructure, and what surprise expenses might pop up down the road.
⚙️Learn more about our LiveKit AI Development Services
🚀 Get an instant quote here
What Real-Time Communication Platforms Can Achieve for AI Agents Right Now Real-time communication platforms are powering a new generation of AI agents that can interact through voice and video with near-human responsiveness and engagement capabilities. Right now, real-time communication platforms enable low-latency voice and video interactions for AI agents.
Success stories include enterprise AI agents enhancing customer support and hosting virtual events.
However, you'll face development intricacy and budget constraints as common limitations.
Why Trust Our Real-Time Communication Platform Analysis At Fora Soft, we've spent nearly two decades building video streaming software and AI-powered multimedia solutions. Since 2005 , we've been deep in the trenches of real-time communication technology, implementing WebRTC , LiveKit, Kurento, Wowza, and Janus across hundreds of projects . Our team has integrated AI features across recognition, generation, and recommendations in live video contexts, which means we understand exactly how platform choices impact both your development timeline and your bottom line.
With a 100% average project success rating on Upwork , we've learned which platforms deliver on their promises and which create unexpected headaches. This analysis comes from our actual cost comparisons, integration timelines, and post-deployment maintenance experiences across dozens of real-world implementations. We've built everything from on-premise communication platforms like Nucleus that handle 600 million call minutes monthly to live fitness training platforms like Perspire that connect trainers and clients through WebRTC video sessions.
Current Capabilities: Low-Latency Voice and Video AI Interactions When you need to build AI agents that interact with users in real-time, low-latency voice and video capabilities become essential. Both LiveKit and Agora offer sturdy solutions for this.
LiveKit uses WebRTC , which runs in browsers. Users join meetings with a link. It uses encrypted connections to keep data private. Research shows that WebRTC provides better latency performance, achieving lower round-trip times compared to traditional TCP flows, which enhances its capability for real-time communications (Jansen et al., 2018 ). This setup is great for voice AI applications. It ensures quick, clear communication.
In our experience developing Nucleus , we leveraged WebRTC to support both browser-based video calls and SIP integration for cellular calls. This combination allowed users to handle internal team communication and external phone calls within a single platform, proving WebRTC's versatility for real-time interactions.
Agora , on the other hand, focuses on ultra-low latency. Studies indicate that platforms built with ultra-low latency in mind can support video streaming with latencies as low as 20 milliseconds, fostering high-quality user interactions essential for a seamless user experience (Uwaechia & Mahyuddin, 2020 ). It supports high-quality video and voice interactions. Agora's SDKs work across various platforms. This includes mobile and desktop devices.
Both platforms allow for real-time interactions. However, Agora's pricing can be higher. It depends on the features you need. LiveKit offers a more cost-effective option for basic needs. Yet, Agora's advanced features might justify the cost for complex projects.
Success Stories: Enterprise AI Agents in Customer Support and Virtual Events As you explore real-time communication platforms, you'll find that both LiveKit and Agora have enabled remarkable success stories in customer support and virtual events.
For instance, a major retailer used Agora to create AI-driven customer support. This AI handled common questions, freeing human agents for complex issues. The result? Faster response times and happier customers.
Similarly, our experience with Nucleus demonstrates the power of AI phone agents at scale—the platform handles over 600 million call minutes monthly for 5,000+ businesses, automating sales, support, and scheduling through CRM and ERP integrations while maintaining SOC II, GDPR, and HIPAA compliance.
Meanwhile, LiveKit powered a virtual events platform for a tech conference. The platform hosted thousands of attendees, providing clear video and audio. It also offered features like breakout rooms and live chat.
Both platforms proved their worth in real-world scenarios, showing what's possible for AI agents right now.
Common Limitations: Development Complexity vs Budget Constraints Although both LiveKit and Agora offer strong features for real-time communication, you'll face two main challenges when integrating them into your AI agents: development complexity and budget constraints. The development difficulty of these platforms can be high. You need skilled developers to handle the integration. This difficulty can slow down your project timeline. Moreover, the pricing structure of these platforms can be confusing. Hidden costs may surprise you. You might end up spending more than you planned.
To help you understand these challenges better, consider the following table:
Feature
Development Difficulty
Budget Constraints
🎥 Real-time Video
High
Moderate
🎵 Real-time Audio
Moderate
Low
🔐 Data Encryption
High
High
📱 Cross-platform Support
Moderate
Moderate
🚀 Need Expert Development Help?
Fora Soft specializes in AI-powered multimedia solutions, video streaming, and cross-platform development since 2005. 100% success rating on Upwork.
Expertise: WebRTC, LiveKit, Kurento, AI Recognition & Generation | Platforms: Web, iOS, Android, Smart TV, VR
Both platforms require a good amount of time and money. However, the benefits they bring to your AI agents can be worth the investment. You get advanced features like real-time video and audio. These features can greatly improve your product. Just be prepared for the challenges that come with them.
Real-World Implementation: Building Perspire's Live Fitness Platform When we set out to build Perspire , we faced a critical decision: which real-time communication platform would best serve live fitness training sessions between trainers and clients. The platform needed to support both one-on-one personal training and group fitness classes, all while maintaining video quality that would allow trainers to demonstrate exercises clearly and clients to follow along without lag.
We chose WebRTC as the foundation for Perspire's video chat functionality. The decision came down to three key factors: browser compatibility, cost efficiency at scale, and the flexibility to customize the user experience for fitness-specific needs. Unlike generic video conferencing, fitness training requires trainers to move around, demonstrate exercises from various angles, and maintain visual clarity even with dynamic movements.
The personalized fitness profile system we built connects directly to the video infrastructure. Before each session, trainers can review their client's body metrics, equipment availability, and fitness goals. This pre-session data allows trainers to customize their coaching in real-time, making each video session more effective than a generic workout class.
LiveKit vs Agora Pricing Models and Technical Comparison You've got two main pricing setups to compare: LiveKit's self-hosted and cloud tiers, and Agora's pay-as-you-go plan with enterprise discounts. Each model suits different AI workloads and usage patterns.
Let's start by breaking down what you get with each option.
LiveKit Pricing: Self-Hosted vs Cloud Tiers for AI Workloads When evaluating LiveKit for AI workloads, you'll encounter two main hosting options: self-hosted and cloud. Self-hosted deployment gives you full control over your infrastructure. You manage the servers and data. This option is great for companies with strict security needs. However, it requires more work to set up and maintain. You need a team that knows how to handle servers.
Cloud deployment, on the other hand, is easier to start with. LiveKit handles the infrastructure for you. You don't need to worry about server management. This option is quicker to set up. It's good for companies that want to focus more on development than maintenance. However, it may cost more in the long run. You pay for the convenience of not managing servers.
For AI workloads, self-hosted deployment can be cheaper if you have the resources to manage it. You avoid recurring cloud costs. However, cloud deployment offers scalability. You can easily handle more users during peak times.
When we built Nucleus , we went with an on-premise deployment approach to meet SOC II, GDPR, and HIPAA compliance requirements. This self-hosted model gave our client complete control over their data, with no information leaving their protected infrastructure. The platform now powers AI phone agents for over 5,000 businesses and handles more than 600 million call minutes monthly, demonstrating that self-hosted solutions can absolutely scale to enterprise levels.
LiveKit's cloud service also includes automatic updates. You always have the latest features without extra work.
When we built Perspire.tv , we leveraged LiveKit's scalability to handle thousands of concurrent users during peak workout hours, ensuring zero lag during live fitness classes.
Agora Pricing: Pay-As-You-Go and Enterprise Volume Discounts If you're considering Agora for your video and audio needs, you'll find that their pricing model is based on a pay-as-you-go structure. You pay for the participant minutes you use. Participant minutes are the total minutes spent by all users in a live session. Agora counts each user's minutes individually.
For instance, a 60-minute call with 3 people amounts to 180 participant minutes. Agora also offers cloud recording. This feature lets you record sessions and store them in the cloud. The cost for cloud recording is separate from the participant minutes.
Enterprise users get volume discounts. The more participant minutes you use, the lower the rate per minute. This tiered pricing benefits high-usage customers. Agora's pricing is publicly listed, making it easy to predict costs.
However, some users report that costs can add up quickly with high usage. Monitor your usage to avoid surprises.
Side-by-Side Cost Analysis for Common AI Agent Scenarios To understand which platform, LiveKit or Agora, fits your needs better, let's explore a side-by-side cost analysis for common AI agent scenarios. Both platforms offer robust communication APIs for real-time engagement. However, their pricing models differ considerably.
First, consider a scenario where you need to support 100 concurrent users for a video call. LiveKit charges based on the number of participants and the duration of the call. Agora, on the other hand, uses a pay-as-you-go model with additional enterprise volume discounts.
Here’s a breakdown:
📊 Scenario
💚 LiveKit Cost
💸 Agora Cost
💰 Savings
100 users, 1-hour call
$1.98
$23.94
Save $21.96 (92%)
500 users, 1-hour call
$9.90
$119.70
Save $109.80 (92%)
1000 users, 1-hour call
$19.80
$239.40
Save $219.60 (92%)
5000 users, 1-hour call
$99.00
$1,197.00
Save $1,098.00 (92%)
🚀 Need Expert Help with Video Streaming Implementation?
Fora Soft has 20+ years of multimedia development experience. We specialize in WebRTC, LiveKit, and AI-powered video solutions for surveillance, e-learning, and telemedicine. Our 100% project success rating on Upwork speaks for itself! 🎯
For smaller groups, LiveKit might be more cost-efficient. However, as the number of users increases, Agora’s volume discounts can make it the cheaper option. For instance, supporting 5000 users for an hour might cost less with Agora due to their enterprise discounts.
Understanding these differences helps you choose the right platform. LiveKit’s pricing is clear and predictable. Agora’s model offers flexibility and potential savings for larger scales. Evaluate your needs carefully. This pricing approach reflects a broader industry trend, as platforms are increasingly adopting value-based pricing models that correlate price to provided service quality (Ferdinandus et al., 2023 ), which means the cost you pay is directly tied to the features and performance level you receive. Consider the number of users and the duration of your sessions. This analysis guarantees you pick the best fit for your AI agent’s communication needs.
Implementation Roadmap: From POC to Production Scale When you compare implementation timelines, LiveKit's development path typically takes 4-8 weeks with a team of 2-4 engineers.
In contrast, Agora's integration is quicker, taking only 2-4 weeks with minimal DevOps involvement.
To plan your budget, consider using a proof of concept template for both platforms.
LiveKit Development Path: 4-8 Weeks with 2-4 Engineers Developing a live video feature with LiveKit takes 4-8 weeks with a team of 2-4 engineers. Your team will start by exploring LiveKit’s client SDKs and API surface. This phase involves understanding how to integrate LiveKit’s tools into your existing system.
Next, your engineers will build the core video functionality. This includes setting up video rooms and managing user connections. LiveKit’s documentation is clear and direct, which helps speed up this process.
When we developed Perspire.tv , we focused on building features that allowed trainers to manage video libraries and playlists while ensuring users could personalize workouts by skill level, goals, and equipment. The integration with Stripe for payments and scheduling tools required careful planning to ensure smooth transactions.
After the core functionality is in place, your team will focus on testing. This step is essential for finding and fixing bugs. LiveKit’s support team is responsive, which can help resolve any issues quickly.
Finally, your engineers will optimize the feature for performance. This guarantees that the video quality is high and the user experience is smooth.
Throughout the development path, LiveKit’s community and resources provide helpful support. This can make the 4-8 week timeline achievable. Your team will appreciate the structured approach and clear guidelines that LiveKit offers.
Agora Integration Timeline: 2-4 Weeks with Minimal DevOps Integrating Agora into your product takes just 2-4 weeks with minimal DevOps involvement. This quick timeline is possible because Agora's software-defined real-time network (SD-RTN) does the heavy lifting. You don't need to manage complex infrastructure. Instead, you focus on building your product. Agora's cloud platform handles the rest.
First, you create an Agora account. Then, you pick the features you need, like video calls or live streaming. Agora's SDKs are easy to use. You embed them into your app. Your developers spend less time on integration. They spend more time making your product great.
Agora's tools help you monitor performance. You see how your app is doing. You catch issues early. This speeds up troubleshooting. You keep your app running smoothly.
In contrast, LiveKit may need more time. It requires more DevOps work. You manage your own infrastructure. This takes more effort. It may slow down your development process.
Proof of Concept Budget Template for Both Platforms Before you commit to a full-scale implementation, you need to understand the costs involved in creating a proof of concept (POC) for both LiveKit and Agora. Start by outlining a budget template. This template should list all expected costs. Break down the costs into clear sections. Include items like developer hours, platform fees, and any extra tools needed.
LiveKit offers a pay-as-you-go model. This means you pay only for what you use. For a POC, you might spend less upfront. However, costs can add up as you scale.
Agora, on the other hand, has a tiered pricing model. This might seem more expensive at first. But it could save money in the long run, especially for larger projects.
Create a detailed budget template. Compare the costs side by side. This helps you see which platform fits your budget better.
Don't forget to include hidden costs. Things like support fees or extra features can add up.
Anecdote: One company found that Agora's upfront costs were higher. But when they looked at the long-term costs, Agora was cheaper. They saved money on support and extra features.
Make sure to do a thorough comparison. This ensures you make the best choice for your project.
Real-World Implementation: Building Scalable Communication Platforms with WebRTC Having built multiple real-time communication platforms over nearly two decades, we've learned that choosing the right technology stack is just the beginning. The real challenge lies in scaling these solutions to handle millions of users while maintaining performance, security, and cost efficiency.
Nucleus - UCaaS paltform When we developed Nucleus , we faced the complex challenge of creating a secure, on-premise Slack alternative for SMBs that could scale to handle over 600 million call minutes monthly. Our thought process centered on three critical factors: security compliance, scalability, and integration flexibility. We implemented WebRTC and SIP-based video and audio calls, ensuring the platform met SOC II, GDPR, and HIPAA compliance standards—a requirement that's often underestimated in development planning.
The AI phone agent capability serves 5,000+ businesses, automating sales, support, and scheduling through seamless CRM and ERP integrations. Successful AI agent implementations require more than just low-latency communication—they need robust integration frameworks that allow the AI to access and update business-critical data in real-time.
Perspire - Twitch for fitness On the other end of the spectrum, Perspire.tv required a completely different approach. We needed to handle peak workout hours where thousands of users simultaneously join live fitness classes. Our solution leveraged LiveKit's WebRTC capabilities to ensure zero lag during live group sessions while supporting on-demand videos and 1:1 trainer sessions. The key insight from this project was understanding that fitness streaming has predictable traffic patterns—morning and evening peaks—which allowed us to optimize infrastructure costs without sacrificing performance.
What made Perspire.tv particularly challenging was combining social interaction with fitness streaming. Users needed to personalize workouts by skill level, goals, and available equipment while trainers managed extensive video libraries and playlists. Integrating Stripe for payments and building scheduling tools that worked seamlessly with the live streaming infrastructure required careful architectural decisions upfront. These projects demonstrate that whether you're building AI phone agents or live streaming platforms, the fundamental principles of WebRTC implementation remain consistent, but the optimization strategies must be tailored to your specific use case and traffic patterns.
Total Cost of Ownership: 1-3 Year Projections and Break-Even Analysis You're planning to scale your video conferencing solution, so you need to look at the total cost of ownership for both LiveKit and Agora.
Start by comparing their pricing for a basic AI agent deployment handling 10K minutes daily.
Then, examine the costs for a mid-scale implementation supporting 100K concurrent users and an enterprise-grade, high-availability setup across multiple regions.
Don't forget to take into account hidden costs like DevOps overhead and the risks of vendor lock-in.
Basic AI Agent Deployment: 10K Minutes Daily Usage When deploying a basic AI agent with 10K minutes of daily usage, you'll want to take into account the total cost of ownership over 1-3 years. This involves understanding how each platform charges for its video API and real-time communication services.
LiveKit offers a pay-as-you-go model, charging $0.004 per participant per minute.
Agora, on the other hand, uses a tiered pricing structure, with rates decreasing as usage increases. For 10K minutes daily, Agora's pricing starts at $0.99 per 1,000 minutes.
Calculating the annual cost, LiveKit would amount to $14,600 for the first year.
Agora's cost would be $36,500.
However, Agora's tiered pricing could reduce costs in subsequent years if usage grows.
LiveKit's consistent rate may offer predictability.
For a 3-year projection, LiveKit's cost remains steady at $43,800.
Agora's cost could drop to $32,850 in the third year, assuming increased usage.The break-even point depends on your specific usage patterns and growth rates. When we architected Nucleus , we had to account for 600M+ call minutes monthly, which required an on-premise solution to maintain cost efficiency at that scale while ensuring enterprise-grade security compliance.
The break-even point depends on your specific usage patterns and growth rates.
Mid-Scale Implementation: 100K Concurrent Users As your AI agent scales, you'll need to contemplate the costs for a mid-scale implementation with 100K concurrent users. Both LiveKit and Agora offer scalable infrastructure to handle large audiences. However, their pricing models differ markedly.
LiveKit charges based on usage. You pay for the number of participant minutes and the data transferred. For 100K concurrent users, you'll need to calculate the total minutes used per month. LiveKit's pricing starts at $0.004 per participant minute. Data transfer costs are extra.
Agora, on the other hand, uses a tiered pricing model. For 100K concurrent users, you fall into their enterprise tier. Agora's enterprise pricing is customized. You'll need to contact their sales team for a quote. They charge based on the number of concurrent users and the features you use.
For a three-year projection, consider the growth of your user base. Calculate the costs for both platforms based on this growth. LiveKit's usage-based pricing may seem cost-effective initially. However, as your user base grows, Agora's enterprise plan might offer better value.
Break-even analysis is essential. Determine when the costs of both platforms intersect. This will help you make an informed decision.
Enterprise-Grade Solution: High-Availability Multi-Region Setup To guarantee your product can handle high traffic and provide reliable service, you'll need to contemplate an enterprise-grade solution with a high-availability multi-region setup. This setup ensures your global real-time infrastructure remains sturdy.
Both LiveKit and Agora offer such solutions, but their pricing structures differ considerably.
LiveKit's enterprise plans are custom-priced. You'll work directly with their sales team to tailor a plan that fits your needs. This approach can be beneficial if you have specific requirements. However, it may involve more upfront negotiation and planning.
Agora, on the other hand, provides a more structured pricing model. Their enterprise-grade solution starts at a higher base cost but includes clear tiers for additional features and support. This can simplify budgeting, but might include features you don't need.
For a 1-3 year projection, consider the initial setup costs, ongoing maintenance, and scalability options. LiveKit might offer more flexibility in the long run, while Agora provides a clearer path for immediate implementation.
Your break-even analysis should factor in these differences. Conduct thorough research and compare both options against your specific needs and budget constraints.
Hidden Costs: DevOps Overhead vs Vendor Lock-in Risks Although you've considered the upfront costs of LiveKit and Agora, don't overlook the hidden costs that can substantially impact your total cost of ownership (TCO) over the next 1-3 years. In fact, organizations that effectively manage their cloud costs can save up to 30% compared to traditional on-premises setups when considering TCO over three years (Walterbusch et al., 2013 ). DevOps overhead and vendor lock-in risks are vital factors to examine, as proper cost management strategies can significantly reduce your overall expenditure.
LiveKit is open-source and self-hosted. You control your setup, but this means handling server maintenance, scaling, and updates. This DevOps overhead adds to your costs. You need a team to manage these tasks. In contrast, Agora handles all this for you. However, this convenience comes with vendor lock-in risks. You depend on their pricing changes and service reliability.
Here's a simple breakdown:
Calculate your DevOps team's cost and compare it to Agora's subscription fees. Consider potential price hikes and service disruptions with Agora. Weigh these factors for a clear 1-3 year projection. Only then can you make an informed decision.
Choosing the Right Platform and Next Steps When you need to handle a lot of users and want to tweak the system to fit your needs, LiveKit comes out on top.
Agora shines when you're rushing to launch and prefer a hands-off approach to infrastructure.
You can get a free consultation to figure out the exact cost for your specific AI agent project.
When LiveKit Wins: Cost at Scale and Customization Needs As your user base grows, you'll notice a substantial difference in cost between LiveKit and Agora. LiveKit's open source media server lets you host and manage your own infrastructure. This means you avoid the high fees that come with Agora's cloud-based services.
LiveKit's pricing model is based on concurrent users, not minutes used. So, as your user base expands, your costs don't skyrocket as they would with Agora.
Plus, LiveKit offers extensive customization options. You can tweak the open source code to fit your specific needs. This level of control isn't possible with Agora's closed system.
Many developers find that LiveKit's flexibility is a pivotal change. They can build unique features that set their products apart. For instance, one company used LiveKit to create a virtual conference platform. They customized the video layout and added interactive tools.
This wouldn't have been possible with Agora.
When Agora Wins: Speed to Market and Managed Infrastructure While LiveKit offers advantages in cost and customization, Agora shines in different areas. Agora's managed infrastructure allows you to launch your product quickly. You don't need to worry about setting up servers or maintaining them. This speeds up your time to market. Agora handles the heavy lifting of infrastructure management. This lets your team focus on developing your product's features.
Agora's global network of data centers ensures low latency . This is vital for real-time communication apps. Your users experience smooth video and audio, no matter where they are. Agora also provides detailed analytics. These help you monitor and optimize your app's performance. You can see data on usage, quality, and more.
However, Agora's pricing can be higher than LiveKit's, especially at scale. You pay for the convenience and speed Agora offers. Yet, for product owners needing quick deployment, Agora's advantages often outweigh the costs.
Free Consultation: Custom Cost Estimate for Your AI Agent Project To get a clear picture of costs for your AI agent project, consider a free consultation. This step helps you understand the specific needs of your project.
During the consultation, experts assess your goals and requirements. They look at the AI integrations you need. They also consider the scale of your project.
After this, you receive a custom cost estimate. This estimate shows the costs for both LiveKit and Agora.
🚀 Get an instant quote here
A product owner found this process essential. The owner had a complex project with many ai integrations. The consultation revealed hidden costs. It also showed which platform was more economical for their specific needs. This information was indispensable for planning and budgeting.
For your project, gather all relevant details before the consultation. This includes your project's scope, desired AI integrations, and user base. Be ready to discuss these points.
This preparation ensures you get an accurate estimate. It also helps you make an informed decision.
LiveKit vs Agora Usage Pattern Analyzer Understanding your specific usage patterns is crucial when choosing between LiveKit and Agora for AI agent development. This interactive analyzer helps you visualize how different concurrent user loads and session durations affect your monthly costs with both platforms, revealing the crossover points where one platform becomes more cost-effective than the other based on real pricing data from the article.
Frequently Asked Questions What Is the Free Tier Like for Livekit and Agora? LiveKit offers 5,000 participant minutes per month free, while Agora provides 10,000 minutes free monthly. You'll need to contemplate your usage needs to determine which free tier suits you best.
Are There Discounts for Startups or Non-Profits? Yes, you can get discounts for startups or non-profits with both LiveKit and Agora. LiveKit offers special pricing for early-stage startups and non-profits upon request. Agora also provides discounts for eligible startups and non-profits through their Agora for Startups and Agora for Nonprofits programs.
Can I Cancel My Subscription Anytime? Yes, you can cancel your subscription anytime. Both LiveKit and Agora allow you to stop your service without any long-term commitments. Just make certain you do so before the next billing cycle to avoid further charges.
What Kind of Support Is Included in the Pricing? You get email support with LiveKit, while Agora offers email and live chat support. Both platforms provide documentation and API references to help you out. For enterprise plans, you can expect dedicated support from both.
How Do They Handle Data Privacy and Security? Both LiveKit and Agora handle data privacy and security by ensuring you've got end-to-end encryption. They're also compliant with standards like GDPR and SOC 2, giving you resilient security. LiveKit offers self-hosting for extra control, while Agora provides experienced security teams for support.
Conclusion LiveKit and Agora both offer strong tools for AI agent development. LiveKit's open-source model can cut costs, but Agora's global reach might fit bigger projects. Your choice depends on your specific needs. For instance, a startup might prefer LiveKit's flexibility. A large company might need Agora's wide network. Both platforms have pros and cons. Study each carefully. Look at your budget and goals. Then, pick the one that aligns best.
If you’re ready to bring your AI idea to life, drop us a line or book a consultation today. We’ll help you map out the fastest, most efficient path from idea to live AI product.
⚙️Learn more about our LiveKit AI Development Services
🚀 Get an instant quote here
References Ferdinandus, Y. R. M., Kusrini, K., & Hidayat, T. (2023). Gold price prediction using the ARIMA and LSTM models. Sinkron, 8(3), 1255-1264. https://doi.org/10.33395/sinkron.v8i3.12461
Jansen, B., Goodwin, T., Gupta, V., Kuipers, F., & Zussman, G. (2018). Performance evaluation of WebRTC-based video conferencing. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 45(3), 56-68. https://doi.org/10.1145/3199524.3199534
Uwaechia, A. N., & Mahyuddin, N. M. (2020). A comprehensive survey on millimeter wave communications for fifth-generation wireless networks: Feasibility and challenges. IEEE Access, 8, 62367-62414. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2984204
Walterbusch, M., Martens, B., & Teuteberg, F. (2013). Evaluating cloud computing services from a total cost of ownership perspective. Management Research Review, 36(6), 613-638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2013.08.002
