Gdrive: Fuse vs rclone mount

It might be a silly question,

But is there a difference (in performance mainly) between using rclone mount vs fuse (google-drive-ocamlfuse) directly?
or are there other differences like caching or whatever?

Both products are fuse based file systems so they generally do similar things.

Rclone connects to quite a number of backends and ocamlfuse is for Google Drive only.

They both have very different options in terms of configuration and performance.

It's best to compare yourself and see what fits best for your use case.

So if you wanted to change the storage from Drive later, rclone (and everything you have set up to depend on it) could still be made to work.

rclone goes beyond a fuse mount, providing a set of fault tolerant tools equivalent to rsync, cp, ls etc.. with some resilience to recover from the transient disruptions inherent with cloud storage. If scripting, or syncing significant file sets is your thing that might be relevant.