KoboldCpp vs LiteLLM

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?
FeatureKoboldCppLiteLLM
CategoryLocal LLM RunnersLocal LLM Runners
LicenseAGPL-3.0MIT
LanguageC++Python
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM8,192 MB1,024 MB
Deploymentbinary, bare-metaldocker, kubernetes, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 11,358★ 55,843
First released20232023
ReplacesChatGPTOpenRouter

Why pick each one

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

Choose LiteLLM if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 55.8k GitHub stars
LiteLLM details

Frequently asked questions

Is KoboldCpp or LiteLLM better?

Neither is universally better. LiteLLM has the larger community, while KoboldCpp is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are KoboldCpp and LiteLLM free and open-source?

Yes. KoboldCpp is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and LiteLLM under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run KoboldCpp and LiteLLM with Docker?

KoboldCpp: check the project docs for container support. LiteLLM: yes.

Related comparisons