ZeroClaw vs PicoClaw
ZeroClaw (Rust) and PicoClaw (Go) are both ultra-light AI agent runtimes. ZeroClaw uses under 5MB RAM, under 10ms startup, and a ~3.4MB binary; PicoClaw uses under 10MB RAM, under 1 second startup, and ~8MB binary. ZeroClaw offers the smallest footprint and fastest cold start.
Comparison table
| PicoClaw | ZeroClaw | |
|---|---|---|
| Language | Go | Rust |
| RAM | <10MB | <5MB |
| Startup (0.8GHz) | <1s | <10ms |
| Binary size | ~8MB | ~3.4MB |
| Typical hardware cost | Board $10 | Any $10+ |
When to choose ZeroClaw
- Smallest binary (~3.4MB) and lowest RAM (<5MB)
- Sub-10ms cold start for edge and embedded
- Memory safety and deterministic behavior (Rust)
- Maximum efficiency on $10+ boards
When to choose PicoClaw
- Go ecosystem and tooling are required
- Sub-second startup with under 10MB RAM is sufficient
- Go-first development workflow
Frequently asked questions
- What is the main difference between ZeroClaw and PicoClaw?
- ZeroClaw is written in Rust; PicoClaw in Go. ZeroClaw uses under 5MB RAM and under 10ms startup with a ~3.4MB binary. PicoClaw uses under 10MB RAM and under 1 second startup with ~8MB binary. Both target ultra-light runtimes; ZeroClaw is smaller and faster.
- Which has a smaller binary: ZeroClaw or PicoClaw?
- ZeroClaw has a smaller binary: ~3.4MB versus PicoClaw's ~8MB. ZeroClaw is about 2.3x smaller.
- When should I choose PicoClaw over ZeroClaw?
- Choose PicoClaw if you need Go tooling, prefer Go development, and sub-second startup with under 10MB RAM is sufficient. Choose ZeroClaw for the smallest footprint, sub-10ms startup, and maximum efficiency on $10+ boards.
- Can both ZeroClaw and PicoClaw run on $10 boards?
- Yes. Both target low-cost hardware. ZeroClaw runs on any $10+ board with under 5MB RAM and under 10ms startup. PicoClaw runs on $10 boards with under 10MB RAM and under 1 second startup. ZeroClaw offers tighter resource use.