Which do you prefer and why? SABnzbd or nzbget

[xeddog]

I have been running parallel copies of SABnzbd with SickBeard, and Nzbget with Sonarr to try and determine if one has an advantage over the other. Since SickBeard development and support seems to have ended, that leaves Sonarr winning that battle, so that just leaves a choice between SABnzbd+ and nzbget.

So far, they have been giving identical results about 99% of the time, although download times seem a little bit faster with SAB. I have not actually measured the times, so I can’t say for sure. For a remaining 0.8%, each has exhibited an advantage over the other with SAB will complete a download when nzbget will not, and sometimes vice versa. For the remaining 0.2%, neither works, but it isn’t a fault with either program, it’s because there isn’t an nzb on Usenet. For those, I resort to using torrents with a manual process.

I know I would be perfectly happy with either, but I would just like to know your opinions on which you prefer, and why.

Thanks,

Wayne

[Thirrian]

NZBGet fan here, mainly because everything (sonarr, nzbget, couchpotato until an alternative pops up, etc) runs on my NAS. It has a much lighter footprint in terms of CPU and memory usage.

I just use it for automated downloads, so I have no idea if one or the other is better in terms of e.g. postprocessing scripts and the like, which I don’t need at all.