# Should I still use the MetaMask Connect EVM SDK if my users have the MetaMask extension installed?

**URL:** <https://builder.metamask.io/t/should-i-still-use-the-metamask-connect-evm-sdk-if-my-users-have-the-metamask-extension-installed/3127>\
**Category:** MetaMask Connect\
**Tags:** faq\
**Created:** [May 8, 2026, 12:57pm UTC](https://builder.metamask.io/t/should-i-still-use-the-metamask-connect-evm-sdk-if-my-users-have-the-metamask-extension-installed/3127 "2026-05-08T12:57:30Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![shahbaz](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/builder.metamask.io/shahbaz/32/1527_2.png) [@shahbaz](https://builder.metamask.io/u/shahbaz)\
**Post date:** [May 8, 2026, 12:57pm UTC](https://builder.metamask.io/t/should-i-still-use-the-metamask-connect-evm-sdk-if-my-users-have-the-metamask-extension-installed/3127/1 "2026-05-08T12:57:31Z")

</div>

Yes. The SDK is the recommended integration path regardless of whether the

extension is installed. When the extension is detected, the SDK delegates

directly to the injected EIP-1193 provider — it does not initialize MetaMask

Wallet Protocol (MWP), QR rendering, or mobile transports. The runtime cost on

the extension path is minimal, and you keep a single, consistent connection

surface across all environments (extension, mobile deeplink, and QR/MWP).