SABnzbd vs NZBGet: Which Usenet Downloader?

NZBGet Is Dead — But You Should Know Why People Loved It

NZBGet’s original developer discontinued the project in 2024. A community fork exists, but active development has slowed significantly. SABnzbd is the clear winner for new setups. That said, NZBGet had real technical advantages worth understanding — and many existing users still run it.

SABnzbd is actively maintained, Python-based, and the default Usenet client in most *arr stack guides. It’s reliable, well-documented, and integrates with everything.

NZBGet was a C++ client designed for speed and low resource usage. It could max out a gigabit connection on hardware that SABnzbd struggled with. Its development cessation is the only reason this comparison has a clear winner.

Feature Comparison

Feature	SABnzbd 4.5.x	NZBGet 26.0 (community fork)
Language	Python	C++
Development status	Active	Community fork (limited activity)
Web UI	Modern, responsive	Functional, dated
Download speed	Good (limited by Python/par2)	Excellent (native C++ performance)
Par2 repair	Python multicore par2	Built-in, faster
Unrar	External unrar binary	Built-in
Post-processing	Scripts (Python, shell)	Extension scripts
API	REST API	JSON-RPC API
Sonarr/Radarr integration	Native	Native
Category management	Yes	Yes
Priority queuing	Yes	Yes
Scheduling	Yes (bandwidth limits by time)	Yes
RSS feeds	Built-in	Via extensions
SSL/TLS	Yes	Yes
Server priority/fallback	Yes	Yes (more granular)
Docker image	lscr.io/linuxserver/sabnzbd:4.5.5	lscr.io/linuxserver/nzbget:v26.0
RAM usage	200-500 MB	50-150 MB
License	GPL-2.0	GPL-2.0

The Speed Question

NZBGet’s C++ implementation made it genuinely faster than SABnzbd for two operations:

1. Raw download speed — NZBGet could saturate a gigabit connection using 2-3 threads. SABnzbd needed more threads and more CPU to achieve the same throughput, especially on ARM devices (Raspberry Pi, NAS boxes).

2. Par2 repair — NZBGet’s built-in par2 engine was multi-threaded C++. SABnzbd relied on an external par2 binary. SABnzbd v4+ added multicore par2 support, narrowing this gap significantly.

On modern x86 hardware (any recent Intel/AMD), the speed difference is negligible. On ARM or low-power devices, NZBGet’s efficiency advantage was real and meaningful.

Resource Usage

Resource	SABnzbd	NZBGet
RAM (idle)	100-200 MB	30-50 MB
RAM (downloading + repairing)	300-800 MB	100-200 MB
CPU during par2 repair	Moderate-high	Low-moderate
Disk (application)	~150 MB (Python + deps)	~20 MB (single binary)
CPU arch support	Any (Python)	x86_64, ARM64

On a Raspberry Pi 4 or a Synology NAS with 1 GB RAM, NZBGet’s lighter footprint mattered. On a VPS with 4+ GB RAM, both are fine.

*arr Stack Integration

Both integrate equally well with Sonarr, Radarr, Prowlarr, and the rest of the *arr stack. The setup process is nearly identical:

1. Add the download client in Sonarr/Radarr settings
2. Enter the host, port, and API key
3. Configure categories to match

SABnzbd uses its REST API. NZBGet uses JSON-RPC. Both work perfectly with all *arr applications. No difference in practice.

Docker Setup

SABnzbd:

services:
  sabnzbd:
    image: lscr.io/linuxserver/sabnzbd:4.5.5
    restart: unless-stopped
    ports:
      - "8080:8080"
    environment:
      - PUID=1000
      - PGID=1000
      - TZ=America/New_York
    volumes:
      - sabnzbd-config:/config
      - /path/to/downloads:/downloads
      - /path/to/incomplete:/incomplete-downloads

volumes:
  sabnzbd-config:

NZBGet:

services:
  nzbget:
    image: lscr.io/linuxserver/nzbget:v26.0
    restart: unless-stopped
    ports:
      - "6789:6789"
    environment:
      - PUID=1000
      - PGID=1000
      - TZ=America/New_York
    volumes:
      - nzbget-config:/config
      - /path/to/downloads:/downloads

volumes:
  nzbget-config:

Both use LinuxServer.io images with identical PUID/PGID patterns. Migration between them is a matter of reconfiguring your *arr apps to point at the new client.

Should You Migrate Off NZBGet?

If NZBGet is working for you, there’s no urgent reason to migrate. The community fork continues to receive maintenance updates. Your download client isn’t a security-critical service — it downloads Usenet binaries and unpacks them.

Reasons to migrate to SABnzbd:

• You want active development and new features
• You’re setting up from scratch and want the better-supported option
• You need a feature NZBGet doesn’t have (built-in RSS, modern UI)

Reasons to stay on NZBGet:

• It works and you don’t want to reconfigure your *arr stack
• You’re on low-power hardware where NZBGet’s efficiency matters
• You don’t need new features

FAQ

Is there a maintained NZBGet fork?

Yes — the community fork at nzbgetcom/nzbget on GitHub. It receives bug fixes and compatibility updates but limited new feature development.

Can I use both simultaneously?

Yes. Run both, point some *arr apps at SABnzbd and others at NZBGet. This is a reasonable migration strategy — move services one at a time.

Does SABnzbd support NZBGet’s extension scripts?

No. They use different extension/script formats. You’d need to find SABnzbd equivalents for any NZBGet extensions you rely on.

Which has better mobile apps?

Neither has official mobile apps. Both web UIs work on mobile browsers. Third-party apps like nzb360 and LunaSea support both clients.

Final Verdict

SABnzbd for all new setups. It’s actively maintained, well-documented, integrates with everything, and performs well on modern hardware. The speed gap that once justified NZBGet has largely closed.

NZBGet for existing users on low-power hardware. If it’s running on your Raspberry Pi or NAS and working, keep it. The community fork isn’t going anywhere soon.

For anyone building a new *arr stack today, SABnzbd is the only responsible recommendation. Sending people to a project with uncertain long-term maintenance when a well-maintained alternative exists isn’t good advice.

Related

• How to Self-Host SABnzbd with Docker Compose
• How to Self-Host NZBGet with Docker Compose
• Sonarr vs Radarr
• qBittorrent vs Transmission
• Best Self-Hosted Download Management Tools
• Docker Compose Basics