Learn why agent memory and RAG are fundamentally different, and when to use each approach
Most developers confuse RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) with agent memory. They’re not the same thing, and using RAG for memory is why your agents keep forgetting important context. Let’s understand the fundamental difference.
When building AI agents, developers often treat memory as just another retrieval problem. They store conversations in a vector database, embed queries, and hope semantic search will surface the right context.This approach fails because memory isn’t about finding similar text—it’s about understanding relationships, temporal context, and user state over time.
Documents are the raw content you send to Supermemory—PDFs, web pages, text files. They represent static knowledge that doesn’t change based on who’s accessing it.Characteristics:
Stateless: A document about Python programming is the same for everyone
Unversioned: Content doesn’t track changes over time
Universal: Not linked to specific users or entities
Searchable: Perfect for semantic similarity search
Memories are the insights, preferences, and relationships extracted from documents and conversations. They’re tied to specific users or entities and evolve over time.Characteristics:
Stateful: “User prefers dark mode” is specific to that user
Temporal: Tracks when facts became true or invalid
Let’s look at a real scenario that illustrates the problem:
The Scenario
RAG Approach (Wrong)
Memory Approach (Right)
Copy
Ask AI
Day 1: "I love Adidas sneakers"Day 30: "My Adidas broke after a month, terrible quality"Day 31: "I'm switching to Puma"Day 45: "What sneakers should I buy?"
Copy
Ask AI
# RAG sees these as isolated embeddingsquery = "What sneakers should I buy?"# Semantic search finds closest matchresult = vector_search(query)# Returns: "I love Adidas sneakers" (highest similarity)# Agent recommends Adidas 🤦
Problem: RAG finds the most semantically similar text but misses the temporal progression and causal relationships.
Copy
Ask AI
# Supermemory understands temporal contextquery = "What sneakers should I buy?"# Memory retrieval considers:# 1. Temporal validity (Adidas preference is outdated)# 2. Causal relationships (broke → disappointment → switch)# 3. Current state (now prefers Puma)# Agent correctly recommends Puma ✅
Solution: Memory systems track when facts become invalid and understand causal chains.
# Add a document for RAG-style retrievalclient.memories.add( content="iPhone 15 has a 48MP camera and A17 Pro chip", # No user association - universal knowledge)