Synap Memory vs VaultCrux Memory Core

In-depth architectural comparison of the Synap Memory and VaultCrux Memory Core MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.

Which MCP Server Should You Choose?

Choose Synap Memory when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore Synap Memory Details

V

Choose VaultCrux Memory Core when:

• You need dedicated capabilities in the Knowledge & Memory domain.
• You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
• Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).

Explore VaultCrux Memory Core Details

Feature & Specification Comparison

Specification	Synap Memory Knowledge & Memory	V VaultCrux Memory Core Knowledge & Memory
Summary	Persistent memory for AI agents — log and recall conversation context over MCP.	Remote MCP for VaultCrux Memory Core queries, snapshots, freshness, audits, and contradictions.
Category & Scope	Knowledge & Memory	Knowledge & Memory
Quality signal

Tools & Capabilities Breakdown

Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations

Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "synap-memory": {
      "command": "uvx",
      "args": [
        "maximem-synap"
      ]
    }
  }
}

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "vaultcrux-memory-core": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": [
        "-y",
        "vaultcrux-memory-core"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Related MCP Server Comparisons