Continue vs KoboldCpp

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted local llm runners options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureContinueKoboldCpp
CategoryLocal LLM RunnersLocal LLM Runners
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageTypeScriptC++
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM1,024 MB8,192 MB
Deploymentbare-metal, sourcebinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 35,374★ 11,358
First released20232023
ReplacesGitHub Copilot, CursorChatGPT

Why pick each one

Choose Continue if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 35.4k GitHub stars
  • Written in TypeScript
Continue details

Choose KoboldCpp if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 11.4k GitHub stars
  • Written in C++
KoboldCpp details

Frequently asked questions

Is Continue or KoboldCpp better?

Neither is universally better. Continue has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Continue and KoboldCpp free and open-source?

Yes. Continue is licensed under Apache-2.0 and KoboldCpp under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Continue and KoboldCpp with Docker?

Continue: check the project docs for container support. KoboldCpp: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons