Hyperspell vs Supermemory
A side-by-side comparison of Hyperspell and Supermemory, two Memory tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Hyperspell | Supermemory |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Memory | Memory |
| Pricing (differs) | PAID | FREEMIUM |
| License (differs) | Proprietary | Open core |
| Deployment (differs) | Cloud | Hybrid |
| Platforms (differs) | API | API, Web |
| Model support | Model-agnostic | Model-agnostic |
| Vendor (differs) | Hyperspell (Digital Workers of California, Inc.) | Supermemory |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Hyperspell
Presents connected workspace data as a filesystem agents can mount, instead of making you build retrieval and a vector store yourself.
- 50+ prebuilt workspace connectors
- Filesystem interface works with any agent
- Continuous indexing into a context graph
- SOC 2 and GDPR compliant
- No public pricing listed
- Young, early-stage product
- Cloud-only; data is indexed off-box
Supermemory
MIT-licensed memory engine you self-host or call as a managed API — one recall endpoint across any model.
- MIT-licensed, self-host or managed
- Single recall API across any model
- Connectors: Drive, Gmail, Notion
- Ships MCP server and SDKs
- Younger project, evolving API
- Smaller track record than peers
- Self-hosting needs infra work
When to pick which
Across the signals we compare, Hyperspell and Supermemory differ on pricing, license, deployment, and platforms:
- Pricing
- PAID · FREEMIUM
- License
- Proprietary · Open core
- Deployment
- Cloud · Hybrid
- Platforms
- API · API, Web
Their capability lists differ in recorded depth — compare the full lists above before deciding.