Enchanted vs Petals
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?
Enchanted
Native Ollama client for iOS and macOS
VS
Petals
Run large language models collaboratively in a swarm
| Feature | Enchanted | Petals |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Local LLM Runners | Local LLM Runners |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Swift | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 8,192 MB |
| Deployment | binary | source, docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,983 | ★ 10,483 |
| First released | 2024 | 2022 |
| Replaces | ChatGPT | OpenAI API |
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
Choose Petals if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 10.5k GitHub stars
- Written in Python
Frequently asked questions
Is Enchanted or Petals better?
Neither is universally better. Petals has the larger community, while Enchanted is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Enchanted and Petals free and open-source?
Yes. Enchanted is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Petals under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Enchanted and Petals with Docker?
Enchanted: check the project docs for container support. Petals: yes.