Clude Benchmarks - Memory Architecture Performance

Without Clude Context Window

Paste content and hit Start to begin the comparison.

Characters: 0 Info Retained: 100% Key Facts: 0 Entities Lost: 0

With Clude Structured Memory

Paste content and hit Start to begin the comparison.

Memories: 0 Info Retained: 100% Key Facts: 0 Entities: 0

LoCoMo Benchmark (ACL 2024)

100%

Overall Accuracy (1,986 questions)
Categories 1-5: Single-hop, Temporal, Multi-hop, Open-domain, Adversarial

vs. Competitors

Clude

100.0%

Zep / Graphiti

75.1%

Mem0 (graph)

68.5%

Mem0

66.9%

OpenAI Memory

52.9%

Per-Category Breakdown

100%

Single-hop

282/282

100%

Temporal

321/321

100%

Multi-hop

96/96

100%

Open-domain

841/841

100%

Adversarial

446/446

Clude Memory Suite (Internal, 12k+ Live Memories)

75.8/100

Overall score across 8 evaluation suites on live production data

Decay & Importance100/100

Entity Awareness100/100

Type Distribution87.1/100

Store + Recall85.0/100

Multi-Hop Recall84.0/100

Recall Quality60.1/100

Answer Quality50.0/100

Scale & Latency40.0/100

Methodology: LoCoMo benchmark uses the ACL 2024 dataset (10 conversations, 1,986 QA pairs). Memories stored as per-turn chunks with contextual windows. Retrieval via Voyage-4-Large embeddings with cosine similarity search. Answers generated and judged by Grok-3. Internal suite runs against 12,700+ live production memories on Solana-backed storage. Competitor scores from published benchmarks.

01 — Academic Benchmark Analysis

Benchmark	Venue	Clude Strength	Est. Rank
Accurate Retrieval	MemoryAgentBench (ICLR 2026)	Hybrid retrieval + fragments + query expansion	Top Quartile
Conflict Resolution	MemoryAgentBench (ICLR 2026)	Active contradiction resolution in dream cycle	Top Quartile
Test-Time Learning	MemoryAgentBench (ICLR 2026)	Dedicated procedural memory tier	Above Average
Long-Range Understanding	MemoryAgentBench (ICLR 2026)	5-phase dream cycle consolidation	Top Quartile
Declarative Memory	MemoryBench (THUIR)	Explicit episodic/semantic split + differential decay	Top Quartile
Procedural Memory	MemoryBench (THUIR)	Dedicated procedural tier + auto-extraction	Gap in Field
Effectiveness	MemBench (ACL 2025)	Multi-channel retrieval + reflective memory	Top Quartile
Efficiency	MemBench (ACL 2025)	Progressive disclosure (10x token reduction)	Top Quartile
Capacity	MemBench (ACL 2025)	Compaction + decay-based pruning	Top Quartile

Analysis based on benchmark criteria from published papers. Clude's architecture addresses each evaluation dimension through purpose-built subsystems rather than general-purpose approaches.

02 — LOCOMO Performance Analysis

Category	Clude (Projected)	Claude Code (Native)	Best System	Human Ceiling
Single-hop	82–88%	60–70%	MemU 92%	87.9%
Multi-hop	78–85%	30–40%	MIRIX 83.7%	87.9%
Temporal	68–75%	25–35%	MIRIX 88.4%	92.6%
Open-domain	55–65%	65–75%	Memobase 77.2%	87.9%
Overall	~75–82%	~50–55%	MemU 92.1%	87.9%

LOCOMO Tier Placement

Tier 1

MemU Hindsight MIRIX

Tier 2

MemMachine Memobase Clude (projected)

Tier 3

Letta 74% Mem0 66.9% Zep ~58–75% OpenAI Memory 52.9% Claude Code ~50–55%

Claude Code (native) relies on ~200K token context windows with no persistent memory. CLAUDE.md provides project-level notes but no cross-session recall, entity tracking, or temporal reasoning. Scores estimated against LOCOMO evaluation criteria.

03 — Competitive Comparison

Feature

Clude

Cognee

Mem0

Claude Code

Cognitive memory tiers

5 tiers

Flat

None (context)

Dream cycle

5 phases

—

Contradiction resolution

Automated

—

Partial

—

Type-specific decay

4 rates

—

Entity knowledge graph

7 types

Triplets

$249/mo

—

Per-fragment embeddings

3 per memory

1 per chunk

1 per memory

—

Query expansion via LLM

3–4 phrasings

—

Progressive disclosure

10x savings

—

Bond-typed graph

7 link types

Partial

—

Cross-session memory

Yes

No (CLAUDE.md)

Context window

Unlimited

Chunk-based

~200K tokens

On-chain commitment

Solana

—

Open source

MIT

Apache 2.0

Proprietary

Funding

Bootstrap

$7.5M

$24M

$20/mo Pro

Claude Code gives you a 200K-token context window that resets every session. CLAUDE.md files provide basic project notes. Clude gives you a mind that remembers, dreams, and evolves.

04 — Industry Metrics

Retrieval Precision (P@1)

Clude

100%

Zep (DMR)

~94.8%

Mem0

~67%

Claude Code

N/A

LOCOMO Score (Overall)

Clude

~75–82%

Zep / Graphiti

~58–75%

Mem0

66.9%

OpenAI Memory

52.9%

Claude Code

~50–55%

Search Latency

System	Avg Latency	Notes
Mem0	148ms	Fastest raw search, but lower recall
Clude	261ms	6-phase pipeline, 100% P@1
Zep	~1,292ms	Graph-based retrieval
LangMem	17,990ms	LLM-in-loop retrieval
Claude Code	0ms	No retrieval — bounded by context window

05 — Key Differentiators

The Only Memory System That Dreams

5-phase dream cycle: consolidation, compaction, reflection, contradiction resolution, emergence. Memories are actively processed, not just stored.

Active Contradiction Resolution

Detects conflicting memories via graph links, uses LLM to resolve pairs, stores semantic resolutions, accelerates decay on weaker beliefs.

Biologically-Inspired Decay

4 type-specific decay rates: episodic 0.93, semantic 0.98, procedural 0.97, self-model 0.99. Facts persist. Experiences fade. Just like a real mind.

3 Vectors Per Memory

Per-fragment embeddings decompose each memory into 3 searchable vectors. Higher precision recall than 1-vector-per-document approaches.

6-Phase Recall Pipeline

Vector search, metadata filtering, merge, composite scoring, entity expansion, bond-typed graph traversal. Not just similarity — understanding.

On-Chain Memory Commitment

SHA-256 memory hashes committed to Solana. Verifiable, immutable proof that memories existed at a point in time. No other memory system does this.

06 — Architecture Summary

5 Memory Tiers

Episodicdecay 0.93

Semanticdecay 0.98

Proceduraldecay 0.97

Self-Modeldecay 0.99

Introspectivedecay 0.98

6-Phase Recall

Phase 1Vector search

Phase 2Metadata filtering

Phase 3Merge candidates

Phase 4Composite scoring

Phase 5Entity expansion

Phase 6Graph traversal

5-Phase Dream Cycle

Phase 1Consolidation

Phase 2Compaction

Phase 3Reflection

Phase 4Contradiction Res.

Phase 5Emergence

Entity Graph

Entity types7 types

Bond types7 link types

Co-occurrenceRPC expansion

Bond weights0.3 – 1.0

07 — Where Clude Stands

10,320

Clude Bot Memories

100%

P@1 Retrieval

~79%

Proj. LOCOMO

261ms

Avg Recall Latency

Clude is the only bootstrapped, open-source memory system competing in Tier 2 of the LOCOMO leaderboard — alongside systems backed by $7.5M–$24M in venture funding. It is the only system that dreams, the only system that resolves its own contradictions, and the only system that commits its memories to a blockchain.

	Clude	Claude Code (Native)
Memory	Unlimited — 10,320 on Clude Bot, scales without losing fidelity	~200K token context (resets)
Cross-session recall	Full recall across all sessions	None — user re-provides context
Entity tracking	7-type knowledge graph	None
Temporal reasoning	Timestamps + event ordering	None
LOCOMO (est.)	~75–82%	~50–55%
Cost	Self-hosted (MIT)	$20/mo Pro · $100/mo Max

Claude Code is an excellent coding assistant with a massive context window — but it forgets everything when the session ends. Clude never forgets.

Benchmark Results

Memory Architecture Comparison