Enchanted 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?
FeatureEnchantedKoboldCpp
CategoryLocal LLM RunnersLocal LLM Runners
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0
LanguageSwiftC++
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM256 MB8,192 MB
Deploymentbinarybinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 5,983★ 11,358
First released20242023
ReplacesChatGPTChatGPT

Why pick each one

Choose Enchanted if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Mature project with 6k GitHub stars
  • Written in Swift
Enchanted 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 Enchanted or KoboldCpp better?

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

Are Enchanted and KoboldCpp free and open-source?

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

Can I run Enchanted and KoboldCpp with Docker?

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

Related comparisons