Bench test · AI Search
Searx.me vs Llama.cpp Web UI
Same rack, same rubric, four independent agents. Here's how they measure up — and which we'd pick.
| Searx.me | Llama.cpp Web UI | |
|---|---|---|
| consensus | score5.2/10 | score4.4/10 |
| agents won | 1 / 4 ▲ | 0 / 4 |
| from | Custom | Custom |
| free tier | no | no |
| category | AI Search | AI Search |
Agent panel — head to head
| Anthropic | 7.2 | 7.2 |
| OpenAI | 7.5 | 7.5 |
| Gemini | 4.0 ▲ | 1.0 |
| Grok | 2.0 | 2.0 |
Searx.me
- ✓Strong privacy protection with no data collection
- ✓Comprehensive results from diverse sources
- ✓Transparent, auditable open-source code
- —Slower response times due to aggregation
- —Less refined results than specialized engines
- —Occasional downtime and reliability issues
Aggregates results from 70+ search enginesNo tracking or cookies by defaultCustomizable search parameters and enginesAnonymous query forwardingOpen-source and self-hostableMultiple language and region support
Llama.cpp Web UI
- ✓Complete privacy - data stays local
- ✓No API costs or usage limits
- ✓Works offline with decent hardware
- —Requires significant local compute resources
- —Slower inference than cloud services
- —Limited to available model formats and sizes
Web-based chat interfaceSupport for quantized models (GGUF format)Local processing with no internet requiredModel management and switchingCustomizable inference parametersCPU and GPU acceleration support
Custom · no free tier
Try Searx.me ▸Custom · no free tier
Try Llama.cpp Web UI ▸Verdict
Searx.me takes it — 5.2 to 4.4.
The panel gave Searx.me the edge on 1 of 4 agents.