When comparing KWin vs Hyprland, the Slant community recommends Hyprland for most people. In the question“What are the best Wayland compositors?” Hyprland is ranked 3rd while KWin is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose Hyprland is:
Animations smoother than you can imagine.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Integrated compositing manager
KWin has built-in compositing with options on how it performs that can be changed by the user in the settings.
Pro Highly configurable
KWin has a very configurable environment. Just about any option that you would like to adjust will be available in the settings.
Pro Beautiful interface
KWin has an assortment of attractive desktop effects, creating a rather beautiful interface.
Pro Window effects
KWin offers an assortment of window effects, such as wobbly windows and window shadows/glow.
Pro Can be configured to be similar enough to Windows so it makes life easier for fresh converts
While kwin is far more powerful, it can be configured to be similar enough to Windows - for people who just changed operating systems and don't really want to learn something new, it works great
Pro Offers desktop workflow
In an age where everyone seems to be moving to touch interfaces, KDE remains one of the last DEs that still caters for desktop users.
Pro Effortless VSync
VSyncing with NVIDIA blobs can be tricky (the dreaded tearing) but with KWin, video and OpenGL games display flawlessly.
Pro Readable code
Much better than any GObject based mess.
Pro Smooth
Animations smoother than you can imagine.
Pro Uses wlroots
The best Wayland compositor library built on standards.
Pro Plugins
Has a plugin system.
Pro Beautiful
Pro Easy to customize
Has a nice wiki which makes customizing it very easy.
Cons
Con Dependent on some KDE libraries
This makes stand-alone KWin somewhat inconvenient to set up, as opposed to openbox and awesome, to name but a few.
Con Some effects are slow and jerky
Some of KWins effects (such as present windows) can be a bit slow or jerky, resulting in uneven fluidity. This is no longer true on modern versions.
Con Not really useful as standalone WM
No panel, no menu - just no way to start applications.
Con Early development stages
It has a few bugs and missing features.
Con Difficult setup
It has a lot of dependencies which is difficult to find and build in Debian. Also most dependencies are not found in the system repository.