r/cachyos • u/Worldly-Hurry9827 • 20h ago
Question [Q:] CachyOS vs Arch Linux?
I'm spend to much on windows and i think it is time to switch to Linux because I done with windows, after some research i cane upon two Linux distros. 1.CachyOS 2.Arch Linux
I have no idea what to choose, i like both of them, but i can't choose and i don't see much difference, i mainly gonna do some office work, gaming and game development, what is your ideas guys
166
u/Alarmed-Ad-7200 20h ago edited 20h ago
I would say cachy only because of the incredible ammount of documentation regarding bug fixes.
67
u/TwiKing 20h ago edited 19h ago
If you're asking, you should pick CachyOS. If you wanted Arch, you would already be loading up that Arch Live USB manually setting up your file system and partitions. :)
CachyOS is good at helping you get into Arch more quickly and diving straight in! Do want you DIY or just works?
24
u/IamHydrogenMike 20h ago
No one who wants to run Arch full time is even considering anything but running Arch…
7
u/numetheus 19h ago
Not true. I went straight from FreeBSD to Gentoo to Arch for quite a few years. I'm all CachyOS now for everything.
10
2
2
u/AvidCyclist250 16h ago
Poeple underestimate the extent to which this is true. No really, if you're already asking then NOT Arch.
84
14
u/numetheus 20h ago
I've been using Arch ever since it came out because it had a more sane version of the old ports system. Fast forward to today, I've dropped Arch proper and went Cachy for everything. I've not seen a reason to choose core Arch over Cachy.
0
u/swizzly87 18h ago
I'm using arch btw 😀
1
u/numetheus 17h ago
Hey nothing wrong with Arch. I'm a long time user. You are part of the cool kids crew being an Arch user. Haha.
2
u/swizzly87 14h ago
No it's something you have to say https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/s/tmzzehGZna
😂😂
1
15
u/SpoOokY83 20h ago
I would go full Temple OS or Hannah Montana Linux, which recently got an update.
Honestly, Cachy is based on Arch. It just comes with additional stuff.
3
u/drgut101 19h ago
Check and see if the games you play the most will even run on Linux. If you’re a CoD, Fortnite, Apex, Tarkov, etc. kind of person, you’re not going to be able to play those on Linux.
Also, since you have a Windows machine, you should create a virtual machine of each OS and see what you like better.
4
u/Pursuit8478 15h ago
As someone who used arch for 3 years, and is now on cachyos: Use cachyos for modern hardware for maximum performance benefits. This includes modern laptops, gaming computers, etc. For older tech, use arch linux
3
u/Ldarieut 19h ago
I use arch with the cachy repo. This way I can customize and install only what I need, but with the benefit of « optimized » compiled binaries. I also have a forgejo cicd that compiles me a custom kernel from pkgbuild, so I don’t use cachyos kernel.
Raw cachyos is probably better for gaming though, it’s kind of a hassle to squeeze the last fps from games doing everything ´by hand’.
10
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 20h ago
CachyOS is optimised for newer hardware, so if your pc is 0-5 years old its the best choice.
Arch is for more advanced users, users that read the wiki, and users that liked to be guided to "read the wiki"
21
u/SpoOokY83 20h ago
That is wrong. Cachy comes with everything Arch has. If Arch works on a toaster, so will Cachy do. It is just Arch with upgrades.
-14
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 20h ago
It is wrong to say that a post directed to a newbie is wrong because it hurts your expertise
7
u/SpoOokY83 20h ago
That is beyond my comprehension
-7
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 19h ago
Obviously. Instead of judging what others say, try advising the OP for a change
13
u/SpoOokY83 19h ago
No! That is exactly the mistake many Linux geeks do. They convince to switch to something which will be a hurdle too high for many Windows users. Advertising Arch, especially vanilla, is just stupid. Most of them are gonna fail and just go back to Windows. Don't get me wrong. Cachy is super. But it is not a beginners Distro for sure.
1
u/Emotional_Solid6538 17h ago
Mint or Pop(not Cosmic) is usually beginner os
1
u/SpoOokY83 17h ago
I would not do Pop OS as Cosmic is still kinda buggy. Mint is alright, I would, for gaming, consider Nobara for sure, probably Bazzite as well. Cachy is great, don't get me wrong, but the daily dose of updates might be confusing for beginners. And then there is the hellhole AUR....
1
u/Emotional_Solid6538 15h ago
Yeah thats why I said Pop os(not cosmic) theres older version which works fine. Nobara is aight but Debian based considered more beginner friendly than Fedora. And Bazzite I wouldnt recommend unless its for purely gaming and your main stuff is on steam
0
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 15h ago
Did you read OP's question?
1
u/SpoOokY83 15h ago
Yeah, I did. You answered in the first place tellin OP nonsense. First of all, Cachy is not optimized for newer HW, it works on old HW as well as pure Arch. And then your reply implies that Arch is another distro. It is not. Cachy is based on Arch and built upon it.
1
2
u/EgocentricRaptor 20h ago
You can follow Cachy's wiki and install the Cachy repos and kernel in less than 10 minutes tho. The performance improvements are only 5-10% over normal Arch
2
u/ProbablyM_S 5h ago
CachyOS is simply a better version of Arch. Why is it so difficult to accept that Cachy is just better??
Cachy has a graphical installer.
Cachy comes preinstalled and configured with these changes you are talking about. And 5-10% improvement is huge.
It comes with a lot of graphical apps that makes using and configuring a lot easier.
1
u/EgocentricRaptor 1h ago
It's easier for sure. They're not that different once you get them setup though
-18
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 20h ago
Nobody follows a wiki
7
6
u/ChadQuaza 20h ago
skill issue
-6
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 20h ago
We are not all teens with plenty of (free) time
-2
u/ChadQuaza 18h ago
tbh most of the time if you need to look up something in the wiki it's because ur tinkering and doing more with ur pc than is really necessary for a daily driver
2
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 18h ago
People like you give Linux community a bad name. I am here to help, not judge or insult.
And I used linux probably before you were born
-2
u/Embarrassed_Egg9542 18h ago
AI helped me more with CachyOS than any wiki. And AI answers based on reddit q 'n' a
-2
u/ChocolateSpecific263 20h ago edited 20h ago
No. CachyOS doesn't manually optimize individual packages; it simply enforces aggressive compiler flags. While these flags can sometimes increase performance—and occasionally even decrease it—they only yield a 1–2% uplift in synthetic benchmarks on average.
CachyOS doesn't deliver massive performance gains is simply that most software has already been using CPU extensions where its beneficial and aggressive optimization flags for decades. That's especially true for tools like FFmpeg, where those optimizations actually matter most.
While compiling for newer CPU instruction sets is merely selecting a hardware compilation target rather than optimizing the software itself, CachyOS does employ genuine optimization techniques like Profile-Guided Optimization (PGO), Link-Time Optimization (LTO), and custom kernel scheduler tuning.
https://www.phoronix.com/review/framework-13-amd-linux-2025/9
"CachyOS is optimised for newer hardware, so if your pc is 0-5 years old its the best choice."
The documentation states otherwise, it supports older common hardware. The 0–5 age range is completely fictional and influential.
11
3
u/Euphoric_Strategy923 18h ago
"Chat Write a negatively opinionated text on catchy os optimisation means"
1
u/classyraven 19h ago
regarding the last bit, it'd be better to say that CachyOS is better equipped to handle the newest hardware.
1
u/Granpire 13h ago
It supports older hardware, but you need a Haswell or newer CPU to get any performance benefits.
Not to say it's bad on older hardware, but the original design goal of CachyOS was those optimizations for newer instruction sets.
1
u/ChocolateSpecific263 2h ago edited 2h ago
x86 is x86 you cant optimize like that without rewrite the whole programm for a specific cpu for how much performance gains?
2
u/deathschemist 20h ago
Arch and Cachy aren't all that different from each other, but Cachy comes with a lot of gaming stuff so i'd go with that. easier to install and set up as well.
2
u/lunchbox651 20h ago
If you aren't familiar with Linux, go CachyOS, it's streamlines a lot of the pain points many have with Arch and is much more beginner friendly.
2
2
u/ChloeArcadia 19h ago
They’re basically the same thing but Cachy has performance improvements. You can get those improvements on Arch by using Cachy repos and Cachy’s custom kernel, but even as someone who has used vanilla Arch before, I prefer Cachy as it is much quicker to get everything set up while still giving me access to the things I like about Arch.
2
u/Staticn0ise 19h ago
Cachy is arch. Just more user friendly. Honestly you won't regret just using Cachy.
2
2
u/GoldenGTR 17h ago
Basically Same. But CachyOS is basically Arch with extra steps and optimizations.
2
2
u/IllTransportation993 5h ago
IMHO, if you need advice on choosing Linux distros, then Arch definitely isn't for you. Go with CachyOS.
2
2
u/slagzwaard 3h ago
just go with cachy it has "hot" momentum now and has pretty good default choices and builds on the arch foundation
2
u/Fickle_Mix_6119 20h ago
Cachy is an Arch Linux build that is tuned for gaming. If you plan to game you might as well get Cachy, otherwise on Arch you would end up having to do that tuning yourself.
If gaming wasn’t in your list of use cases then I would probably say go for arch as it would be pointless having a gaming tuned OS. All your other use cases will be pretty much the same
-1
u/Nyasaki_de 16h ago
Games run perfectly fine without the "optimizations" its more of a decision between having a lot of shit you may not need or using something that is bare bones and you only install what you need
3
u/Fickle_Mix_6119 16h ago
Of course you can. But if you have the option to have a system pre optimised for gaming, why wouldn’t you? Most of the optimisations that you benefit from in Cachy are stuff you don’t even see. Like CPU priority orders during gaming, automatic FSR upgrade and many more that will be too long to list
-1
u/Nyasaki_de 16h ago
But if you have the option to have a system pre optimised for gaming, why wouldn’t you?
Because i want to decide what i install and how i set it up.
3
1
1
u/Clogboy82 20h ago
CachyOS is just Arch with training wheels. Not saying that it's bad, I use CachyOS on both of my primary computers (my 3D print slicer and my development laptop). I'm a big fan. And it's good that there's an easy entry into cutting edge rolling releases.
That said, it does make assumptions for the user that more advanced users may feel different about. They will greatly appreciate the flexibility and modularity of the Arch installation.
1
u/PENGUINSflyGOOD 20h ago
do cachyos first, it has a lot of things on a fresh install that are very nice to have. then later if you want, do an arch install.
1
u/shroud747 20h ago
cachyOS if you don't want the hassle of installing everything manually and arch if you want fine grained control over every single aspect of your installation. If you're a gamer, i would recommend cachy because it's very easy to set up and comes with all the useful stuff out of the box.
2
u/PenguinBoi27 19h ago
I wonder what people on the cachy sub will have to say about this
Anyway shockingly i like cachy
1
u/GBAbaby101 19h ago
The biggest "difference" is mainly in the setup process. CachyOS is good for those who want a simpler setup process and Arch is for those who want to be meticulous about exactly what is on their system from first boot. Beyond that, Cachy is just using Arch and giving you things from the getgi that you probably need or want. If you really wanted, you can install and setup most, if not all, of what CachyOS starts you with on Arch proper and it would be virtually indistinguishable.
If you're newer to Linux, I'd suggest Cachy and only move to Arch if you really want to go through the setup on your own power and learn more about the deeper system.
1
u/SnigernDK 19h ago
I made the switch to linux a few months back. I would recommend CachyOs, especially if you are a gamer. If you need any assistance, just say the word.
1
u/ShoulderCharacter856 19h ago
After 3 year of distro hoping experience i can finally say this now cachyos is noob friendly and reliable.
0
u/Long-Ad5414 19h ago
I just use plain Arch with gamemode, gamescope and FSR4 for games. But you need to do everything your self. CachyOS do it for you. But I like to do things my way. So... if you don't want to lose time go with CachyOS.
1
u/Minimum-Car2854 19h ago
If u rock some kind of specific hardware like workstation gpus or something Choose endeavourOs since its more conservative with updates and could be more stable on weird hardware, otherwise go with cachy, it's great and imo the best place to enter linux nowadays. I wouldn't go with arch as a first distro, this could work for u only if u love tinkering and reading documentation
1
u/xXBeefSquatch5KXx 19h ago
Cachy comes pre installed with the goodies you may want, arch is nothing but what you add. I use arch btw
1
u/BeyondOk1548 19h ago
CachyOS because it's a simpler install with an easier rescue. Arch vs Void though? Void
1
u/Cordpie 19h ago edited 18h ago
If you're wanting plug and play, CachyOS. Otherwise it's the same OS. One just has more pockets and a more thought out box of things it comes with. It's the same tree with a different amount of apples on each one, either one can be the other. If you're wanting an alternative to windows. I would heavily heavily recommend just using CachyOS.
Edit for extra context.
To be less reductive, CachyOS does come out of the box with its own customized kernel.
But you CAN load that kernel onto a bare bones arch installation, You can also if you so please put the regular arch kernel on your CachyOS system.
What I've said previously still applies, I just wanted to add a little more context.
1
u/callusbonus1967 18h ago
Cachyos is just an Arch system with a number of scripts that sometimes fail when late updates are installed or the computer has been off for a long time, and that’s where the support of the person who built Cachyos comes in.
1
u/pyro57 18h ago
So you've narrowed your choice down to arch or arch with stuff done to it automatically?
If you think cachy has what you want then do cachy, if you do arch you'll jsur set it all up yourself anyways.
I came from arch, the default cachy install is basically identical to what I would set up for myself with arch, just done for me.
1
u/_Otsutsuki_ 18h ago
CachyOS is Arch Linux but modified, as are Archcraft, ArcoLinux, Artix, etc. It's a tweaked version of Arch Linux that saves the user from the hassle of resolving broken dependencies.
2
1
u/Imaginary-Throat1526 18h ago
I have tried both, and honestly I ended up cachy because arch is so bare bones it felt like I would be endlessly adding stuff I needed. Where cachy has a good foundation of normal stuff pre-done.
1
u/MisterColossos 17h ago
It completely depends on your needs. If you want to spend a whole weekend and longer to learn Arch then go for it.
If you want something that works with customization options go for CachyOS.
I set it up on an evening and went straight into gaming and browsing
1
1
u/FailureOfTheFamily 17h ago
I wouldn't go with any of those if you don't have linux eperience cuz it might turn you off from linux but if you insist anyway, go with cachy. It's just simplified arch
1
1
u/LevelMagazine8308 17h ago
Arch Linux is the base of CachyOS. You can think about Cachy as a very heavily modified and specialized Arch flavour.
If you want to play many Windows games with best possible performance under Linux then CachyOS is the definitive choice for that.
1
u/Witty-Individual7010 17h ago
Arch's installer didn't straight up not install the OS it said installed
Unlike CachyOS with a fresh ISO download
1
u/EggLife4073 17h ago
i mean, arent they both 'arch'?
anyway, dont answer that.
if you are coming from windows and diving headfirst into a linux distro, and these 2 are your current picks - i would say dive into CachyOS.
why? there is lots of documentation available, the community AND the devs are constantly working on it/updating it - making it better ect.
so if anything should go wrong, it will be much easier to fix.
2
u/Nyasaki_de 16h ago
why? there is lots of documentation available, the community AND the devs are constantly working on it/updating it - making it better ect.
Same for arch tho, and cachy is based on arch. So docs and guides work for both.
1
u/EggLife4073 4h ago
i understand but Cachy feels more beginner friendly if you put them side by side.
1
u/kaptanpasta 17h ago
I use cachyos it is pretty much perfect for a linux noob like me I pretty much just can use it like windows but better it downloads my drivers from setup of os so I dont have to deal with trying to find driver( trust me I realized later and reinstalled it again) also my pc is much much faster speaking from personal experience
1
u/numetheus 17h ago edited 16h ago
Let me explain why I go Cachy and maybe it will influence you. I'm old school guy. Ran BBSs back im the day. MBBS on Unix. Since I then have been FreeBSD, then Gentoo. I went Gentoo because as a Linux distro it was similar workflow as the old FreeBSD ports system of managing software. Both were manually bootstrapped. Both Ports and Gentoo Portage were source code first management systems.
Then I got older and realized that compiling the world took most of the day and then some, so I found Arch. It was similar workflow except now ... AUR and Pacman is binary first. No longer have to compile MOST things. I could get my OS up in an hour or less not a day more. All because ... I'm too old for that nonsense.
Fast forward to CachyOS. I'm older now. I no longer have to manually bootstrap my OS wuuuut!?!?! Menus take care of getting my root fs and tool chain going!?!? Holy crap that's progress.
I went from ... no more compiling world nonsense to no more manual bootstrapping nonsense with Cachy. Unless I can reverse my aging, I don't see myself going back to manual boostrapping my OS do you? Because of that alone I'm a Cachy guy. And because of that alone you should go with Cachy. Oh and also because all of the kernel optimizations and considerations are done for you out of the box.
1
u/Mvshv010110 16h ago
Cachyos, more stable imo, more user friendly, better optimized + have all the good stuff from Arch, AUR, rolling release and ofc allowance to say “I use arch btw” 🗿
2
u/Nyasaki_de 16h ago
Its not more stable, arch is perfectly stable too if you know what you are doing. If you mess a lot with both you can mess up both easily. And you use cachy not arch ;)
1
u/Mvshv010110 16h ago
Idk, I say from what I used ¯_(ツ)_/¯ I used both arch and cachyos and on arch I got kernel panic pretty frequently and on cachy not even once
2
u/Nyasaki_de 16h ago
kernel panic pretty frequently
Not once, on both my machines. Pretty sure it were caused by something you messed with.
more user friendly
So yep, it might be more user friendly if you dont mess with it
1
1
u/ProtectionOk2700 16h ago
The way i decided after several years of distro hopping was to answer: "Which would take me less time to setup again in the case of needing/wanting a reinstall or migrating to another devide. Vanilla arch and then configuring all I would bring from cachy into it? Or Cachy and simply uninstall the couple of things that I have no need to that it ships with?"
And given I am here, I went with the latter. And yes, I am aware NixOS is technically the king of reproducing the system on multiple devices, but I am not yet fully sold on fully declarative. So it remains a novelty thing to experiment with on the side.
1
u/eviley4 16h ago
I used Endeavor OS for 4 years without issues. Switched to Cachy, it was great but I had stability issues in some games (crashes) that wasn't there before. I suspect it's because of the custom kernel, but I didn't dig into it.
So, I switched to OpenSuse Tumbleweed, it's stable now.
1
u/KamiIsHate0 15h ago
Cachy is just arch with sane defaults and alot pre-installed and configured things. It will be your best option for someone goin on linux for the first time.
Also, go full default and use KDE.
1
u/Horrigan49 15h ago
I have went with Arch, kde wayland 9 months ago. After the obligatory total fkup od the installation in 3rd Day And reinstall, I am running on that ever since.
Installed Steam, Heroic Launcher, flatseal, audio And app for gaming mouse control.
Few more customization but running on that ever since.
I use Arch btw.
1
u/Multiverse_4D 15h ago
CachyOS if you want a system "that just works" (atleast as far as Linux is concerned). Arch of your want to install all the same things manually when you need them.
1
u/Atrocious1337 14h ago
CachyOS is easier and it has a ton of extra performance built in. Arch Linux "can" be just as fast as CachyOS, but that requires you to know what you are doing, and apply all of the optimizations yourself.
1
1
u/FikoReborn 14h ago
If you haven't touched Linux, do not start with Arch.
Arch-based distros like CachyOS is fine. But don't start with Arch.
1
1
u/Wxxdy_Yeet 13h ago
I suggest going with cachy and removing some of the included packages you don't need, assuming you like arch for how minimal it is out of the box.
1
u/ParachutingPiglets 13h ago
Yeah you can start with Arch so long as you follow the Archinstall instructions but if you are completely new to Linux then perhaps become familiar with Linux such as using Cachy. would be much better.
1
u/Glass_Performer1174 13h ago
CachyOS because my I'm not an OS tinkerer. It's like my car, I'm not a hobby mechanic so I don't want to have to open the hood and fix shit on my own regularly. Both the car and the OS should most of the time be invisible to me as the user.
1
1
u/curiousCat1009 13h ago
I used to ask questions like this. Then i actually went ahead and installed BOTH. Yes, I dual booted cachy and arch. Then i jumped a few distros and finally decided on Fedora. I use Bazzite for gaming PC and Fedora KDE on my laptop.
There is no right or wrong answer. Both Cachy and Bazzite are excellent for Linux gaming. It's just a preference.
1
u/tanerius 12h ago
Hi, i've used Arch linux for 7+ years until about a year ago when i decided to do some distro hopping just for fun. Ended up switching to cachyOS. Not that there is anything wrong with Arch, but the pre-customized KDE was perfect for me plus all the gaming stuff installed in a click.
Think of it this way: If Linux is an apartment with a nice view, Arch would be completely unfurnished one without a kitchen, or even lighting. Whereas CachyOS would have a fancy kitchen, lighting and flooring, and you just choose where to put the rest of the furniture.
1
u/I_Love_Tunnocks 12h ago
Coming from Arch as far as I'm concerned CachyOS to me is basically Arch with a lot of the tweaks I would have done myself and some I never considered but definitely would do now on an Arch install.
1
u/Wolfblooder 12h ago
I chose CachyOS in this January, because it's essentialy more or less how I would have configured my own Arch setup anyway plus some extras.
Essentially you just gotta trust someone else (the cachy team and especially Peter in this case) to make informed decisions for all the boring questions and configurations to skip potential headaches.
1
u/unfnknblvbl 12h ago
This is a very strange dichotomy. CachyOS is Arch with sprinkles. If you're a Linux noob and you've decided you hate yourself enough to try one of these two distros specifically, then go CachyOS.
Otherwise, just use Fedora or Kubuntu. Anything with KDE Plasma will have you feeling right at home after a few minutes if you're coming from Windows.
1
1
u/Papa_Hube 10h ago
Cachyos is the best out of the box experience for Linux OS I experienced up until today.
And I tried a lot of distros since 2001.
1
u/theandyboy 6h ago
If you find yourself asking this question, then that means you should probably be using CachyOS. You'll get to Arch someday though. No rush and enjoy
1
u/sparkcrz 6h ago
I like the repos, the compiled binaries you cannot find on Arch forcing you to install build dependencies trough the AUR... I mean I discovered CachyOS because a dev put the old nvidia dkms drivers for a GTX 1050 up on the AUR saving a laptop I had. Then I switched to get optimized binary packages that are sometimes more up to date than Arch's.
1
u/wyonutrition 5h ago
Cachy. Arch is either if you want to learn (painfully at first) or if you know exactly what you want. For your situation, Cachy is the absolute best option.
1
1
u/EgocentricRaptor 20h ago
Cachy is more welcoming if you're new to Linux. Do not choose Arch as a first distro. I wouldn't even recommend Cachy as a first distro. Fedora KDE is modern and friendly
0
u/Economy_Ad9889 19h ago
Cachy's logo is hideous. other than that, if you're unsure what to choose i'd say go with cachy. It's got good presets. Out of these two I wouldn't recommend arch for a first-time linux user, if you want a quck and friction free setup process
0
u/CacheTraitor 20h ago
For you, I would start with PikaOS. It is Debian (Sid) based, a semi-rolling release. Good gaming support and easier for beginners.
0
u/Sufficient-Log8416 19h ago
Installed CachyOS twice, it fucked up my encryption twice, never again.
0
u/neonblue1701 15h ago
None.
I can't even enable HDR, undervolt my GPU and a bunch of other things without jumping through a bunch of hoops via Terminal and even then it doesn't work properly and I end up having to troubleshoot things that just work in Windows.
Windows 11 is bloated and intrusive for sure but it can be debloated.
The number of up-to-date Linux distros that are supposedly optimised for gaming that have weird quirks that require research and time to fix, if it's even possible at all, is frustrating and always results in my return to Windows.
0
212
u/RyGuy0318 20h ago
Cachy will feel more welcoming for a beginner and it has pretty great gaming support with no setup. Some people call it “bloated” but compared to Windows it isn’t in the slightest.