Learn how Laminar and Supermemory differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Both Laminar and Supermemory have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Supermemory significantly outpaces Laminar in community adoption with 29,068 stars compared to 3,196 stars on GitHub. This 9.1x difference suggests Supermemory has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Supermemory has 2,527 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Laminar is growing faster, adding 78 stars in the last 30 days (+2.5%) against adding 418 stars for Supermemory (+1.5%). Laminar is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Laminar last updated 15 hours ago and Supermemory 8 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Laminar uses Python, Next.js, Rust.
Both projects started around the same time, with Laminar beginning 2 years ago and Supermemory 2 years ago.
Supermemory uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Laminar's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Laminar also focuses on LLM Observability & Evaluation while Supermemory extends into AI Memory & Context.
Both Laminar and Supermemory offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.