RustDesk Server vs TeamViewer
Both tools enable remote desktop access to Windows, macOS, and Linux machines. TeamViewer is a closed, vendor-hosted service with per-license pricing; RustDesk Server is AGPL-3.0 open source infrastructure you deploy yourself.
| Feature | RustDesk Server | TeamViewer |
|---|
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Proprietary |
| Session routing | Your own servers | TeamViewer cloud |
| Self-hosting | Yes | No |
| Per-device pricing | None on OSS tier | Yes |
| Web console | Server Pro only | Yes |
RustDesk Server is the better choice for regulated industries, security-sensitive organizations, and teams unwilling to pay TeamViewer's per-license fees. Because you control the relay, session traffic never leaves your infrastructure.
TeamViewer is still the better fit when you need a managed cloud option with enterprise support SLAs and no infrastructure overhead. TeamViewer's global relay network handles uptime, updates, and geographic distribution without any operator involvement.
RustDesk Server vs AnyDesk
AnyDesk offers a lightweight client and competitive pricing, but all sessions route through AnyDesk's relay network. RustDesk Server removes that dependency.
| Feature | RustDesk Server | AnyDesk |
|---|
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Proprietary |
| Session routing | Your own servers | AnyDesk cloud |
| Self-hosting | Yes | No |
| Client open source | Yes (RustDesk client) | No |
RustDesk Server is the stronger choice for organizations that need an auditable, fully open stack. The RustDesk client is also open source, so the entire connection path from client to relay to destination can be inspected and modified.
AnyDesk remains easier for ad-hoc support cases where the recipient cannot install software permanently. If your use case is occasional one-time support rather than persistent unattended access, AnyDesk's simpler onboarding can outweigh RustDesk's self-hosting requirements.