Memobase vs Supermemory
A side-by-side comparison of Memobase and Supermemory, two Memory tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Memobase | Supermemory |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Memory | Memory |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Open core | Open core |
| Deployment | Hybrid | Hybrid |
| Platforms (differs) | API | API, Web |
| Model support (differs) | BYO key / model | Model-agnostic |
| Vendor (differs) | Memobase | Supermemory |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Memobase
Models memory as a structured user profile plus timestamped event timeline — tops LOCOMO temporal-reasoning (~85%).
- Distills chats, not raw embeddings
- Strong temporal-reasoning benchmark
- Low-latency on FastAPI/Postgres/Redis
- Python/Node/Go SDKs + MCP server
- Smaller community than mem0/Zep
- Profile schema needs upfront design
- Less production-server tooling than Zep
- Newer, less battle-tested
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, Memobase and Supermemory differ on platforms:
- Platforms
- API · API, Web
Their capability lists differ in recorded depth — compare the full lists above before deciding.