1. Architecture: Conductor follows a monolithic architecture, where all components of the system are tightly coupled. On the other hand, Dapr promotes a microservices architecture, allowing for loosely coupled and independently deployable components.

2. Programming Language Support: Conductor primarily supports Java-based applications, with limited support for other programming languages. In contrast, Dapr provides language-agnostic support, enabling developers to use their preferred language.

3. Service Discovery: Conductor relies on a centralized service registry for service discovery, which can introduce a single point of failure. Dapr, on the other hand, includes built-in service discovery capabilities, allowing for decentralized service interactions.

4. Orchestration vs. Sidecar: Conductor includes an orchestration engine that manages the workflow and coordination between services. In contrast, Dapr takes a sidecar approach, where each service has a Dapr runtime sidecar that handles service-to-service communication and other cross-cutting concerns.

5. Integration with Existing Systems: Conductor provides integration with existing systems through custom adaptors and plugins. Dapr, on the other hand, offers a wide range of pre-built building blocks and components that can seamlessly integrate with existing systems, making it easier to adopt and extend functionality.

6. Deployment Options: Conductor focuses on on-premises or private cloud deployments, making it suitable for organizations with strict data governance policies. Dapr, on the other hand, supports both on-premises and cloud deployments, providing flexibility and scalability options.

In Summary, Conductor follows a monolithic architecture with Java support, whereas Dapr promotes a microservices architecture with language-agnostic support, built-in service discovery, and a sidecar approach, making it easier to integrate with existing systems and offers more deployment options.