One chat, three ways in
People type it peachat, peachchat or peach chat as two words, and all of them land here. What sits behind the name is simple: a 1-on-1 conversation you can hold by typing, by talking, or with the camera on.
18+ only · first matches free for new users · leave any time
In short
Peachat is PeacHub: a 1-on-1 random chat you can hold three different ways. Pick text and you type to one other person; pick voice and you talk without a camera; pick video and you are both on screen. The format is your choice at the match screen, and none of them changes the basic shape — one person, one line, and next whenever you want it.
Peachat is what people type when they half-remember PeacHub. Peachchat with the double c and peach chat as two words are the other two. There is one site behind all of them and one spelling on the door — the rest is just how a name survives being passed on by word of mouth.
Typing asks the least of you: no camera angle to worry about, no room to be quiet enough, no bandwidth to spare. It is also the slowest way to work out whether you actually want to talk to someone, which is the trade you are making.
Most people skip straight from typing to video and never try the step in between. Voice carries tone, timing and laughter — nearly everything that makes a conversation feel like one — while asking nothing of your lighting or your background.
A camera tells you in ten seconds what a text thread takes an hour to hint at. It also asks the most of both people, which is why it works best once there is a reason to bother.
When researchers gave people a choice between connecting by text or by voice, most expected the voice version to be more awkward. It was not. Across several experiments, interactions that included a voice created a stronger sense of connection than text-based ones, and the awkwardness people were bracing for did not materialise — the expectation was simply miscalibrated.
That is worth holding onto if you default to typing. The reluctance is real, but it is a prediction about how something will feel, and the prediction tends to be wrong in one direction. Worth noting that those studies were about conversations in general, not about this site — nobody has run that experiment on random matching.
None of which means you should be on camera before you want to be. The point of having three formats is that you can start where you are comfortable, not where somebody says the connection is strongest.
The awkwardness people brace for before switching to voice mostly does not show up.
Formats are picked per match, not once and for all. Nothing stops you from spending an evening typing and the next one with the camera already on, or from opening in text and moving to a call with the next person entirely.
The one thing that does not change between formats is the structure: one other person, private, and the option to move on whenever you are done. Whether that arrives as words on a screen or a face is a surface detail.
The source for the voice-versus-text passage above. Participants expected voice to be more awkward than text; it was not, and voice produced a stronger sense of connection. These were controlled experiments on conversations between people who knew each other or were newly paired in a study — not a study of random online matching, so read it as evidence about the miscalibration, not about this site.
The IETF document enumerating what browser-based real-time communication is expected to support, including audio-only and audio-plus-video calling. It is a requirements catalogue for implementers rather than an assessment of any particular service.
Text, voice or video — pick at the match screen and change your mind on the next one. 18+ only, first matches free.
Start Match