Skip to content

Protocol Comparison

Detailed comparison of all ARVOS streaming protocols.

Feature Matrix

Feature WebSocket gRPC MQTT HTTP BLE MCAP QUIC
Latency Low Very Low Medium Medium Low Low Very Low
Throughput High Very High Medium Medium Low High Very High
Bidirectional ✅ ✅ ✅ ❌ ✅ ✅ ✅
Multi-client ✅ ✅ ✅ ✅ ❌ ✅ ✅
iOS Version 16+ 18+ 16+ 16+ 16+ 16+ 15+
Setup Low Medium Medium Low Low Low High
TLS Required ❌ ❌ ❌ ❌ ❌ ❌ ✅
Broker Needed ❌ ❌ ✅ ❌ ❌ ❌ ❌

Performance Comparison

Latency

QUIC/HTTP3 ≈ gRPC < WebSocket ≈ MCAP ≈ BLE < MQTT ≈ HTTP

Throughput

gRPC ≈ QUIC/HTTP3 > WebSocket ≈ MCAP > MQTT ≈ HTTP > BLE

CPU Usage

HTTP < MQTT < WebSocket < MCAP < BLE < gRPC < QUIC/HTTP3

Use Case Recommendations

General Purpose

Recommended: WebSocket - Works everywhere - Good performance - Easy setup

High Performance Research

Recommended: gRPC - Maximum throughput - Low latency - Protocol Buffers efficiency

IoT / Multiple Subscribers

Recommended: MQTT - Multi-subscriber support - Broker-based architecture - IoT-friendly

Simple Integration

Recommended: HTTP/REST - Standard HTTP - Easy webhooks - Simple debugging

No Wi-Fi Available

Recommended: Bluetooth LE - Direct connection - No network needed - Low power

Robotics Research

Recommended: MCAP Stream - Industry standard - Foxglove compatible - Rich metadata

Real-Time / Mobile Networks

Recommended: QUIC/HTTP3 - Ultra-low latency - Better on unstable networks - Mobile-optimized

Decision Tree

graph TD
    A[Need Protocol?] --> B{Wi-Fi Available?}
    B -->|No| C[Bluetooth LE]
    B -->|Yes| D{Need High Performance?}
    D -->|Yes| E{iOS 18+?}
    E -->|Yes| F[gRPC]
    E -->|No| G[QUIC/HTTP3]
    D -->|No| H{Multiple Subscribers?}
    H -->|Yes| I[MQTT]
    H -->|No| J{Simple Integration?}
    J -->|Yes| K[HTTP/REST]
    J -->|No| L{Robotics Research?}
    L -->|Yes| M[MCAP Stream]
    L -->|No| N[WebSocket]

Detailed Comparison

WebSocket

Best for: General purpose, first-time users

Pros: - Works everywhere - Bidirectional - Good performance - Easy setup

Cons: - Not the fastest - Single connection per client

gRPC

Best for: High-performance research

Pros: - Very high performance - Protocol Buffers - Type-safe - Industry standard

Cons: - Requires iOS 18+ - More complex setup - Learning curve

MQTT

Best for: IoT, multiple subscribers

Pros: - Multi-subscriber - IoT-friendly - Reliable delivery - Standard protocol

Cons: - Requires broker - Additional infrastructure - Broker can bottleneck

HTTP/REST

Best for: Simple integration, webhooks

Pros: - Very simple - Easy debugging - Universal compatibility - Webhook support

Cons: - Not bidirectional - Higher overhead - Not ideal for high-frequency

Bluetooth LE

Best for: No Wi-Fi, low power

Pros: - No Wi-Fi needed - Low power - Direct connection - Cable-free

Cons: - Low bandwidth - Telemetry only - Limited range

MCAP Stream

Best for: Robotics research

Pros: - Industry standard - Foxglove compatible - Rich metadata - Tool ecosystem

Cons: - Larger files - More complex format - Requires MCAP tools

QUIC/HTTP3

Best for: Real-time, mobile networks

Pros: - Ultra-low latency - Better on unstable networks - Built-in encryption - Future-proof

Cons: - Requires TLS certificates - Complex setup - Certificate management

Next Steps