| 1 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Starting Price | — | $10/mo |
| Capabilities | 5 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Converts inline code comments (prefixed with //) into functional code by sending the comment text to OpenAI's GPT-3 API and inserting the generated code directly into the editor at the comment location. The extension parses the current file context, extracts the natural language intent from the comment, and uses the OpenAI API to generate contextually appropriate code that replaces or follows the comment.
Unique: Uses comment-based triggering (// syntax) as the primary interaction model rather than explicit commands or keybindings, embedding code generation directly into the natural writing flow of code comments. This approach avoids context-switching but lacks explicit control over generation parameters.
vs alternatives: Simpler and more lightweight than GitHub Copilot (no background indexing, lower resource overhead) but lacks codebase awareness and multi-file context that Copilot provides, making it better for isolated snippets than full-project refactoring.
Provides a configuration interface for users to supply their own OpenAI API key, enabling direct API calls to GPT-3 without the extension managing credentials or billing. The extension stores the API key (mechanism unknown) and uses it to authenticate all code generation requests, allowing users to control costs and model access through their own OpenAI account.
Unique: Delegates all API management to the user rather than providing a first-party service, eliminating subscription overhead but requiring users to manage their own OpenAI credentials and billing. This is a cost-shifting model rather than a SaaS model.
vs alternatives: Lower operational cost than GitHub Copilot (pay-per-use via OpenAI) but requires more user setup and responsibility for credential management compared to extensions with built-in authentication.
Automatically inserts generated code into the editor at the location of the triggering comment, modifying the document in-place without requiring manual copy-paste or file navigation. The extension determines insertion point (replacing comment, inserting below, or other pattern) and handles indentation and formatting to match the surrounding code context.
Unique: Performs direct document modification in the editor rather than generating code in a separate panel or preview, embedding the generation result directly into the user's workflow without intermediate review steps.
vs alternatives: Faster than Copilot's suggestion panel (no explicit accept/reject step) but riskier because there's no preview before insertion, making it less suitable for production code where review is critical.
Extracts and sends the current file's content (language, imports, existing functions, variable scope) to the GPT-3 API to inform code generation, enabling the model to generate code that matches the file's style, language, and existing patterns. The extension reads the active editor file and includes relevant context in the API request to improve generation relevance.
Unique: Includes current file content in API requests to GPT-3 for context, but lacks multi-file project awareness or semantic code analysis, limiting its ability to generate code that integrates with broader project architecture.
vs alternatives: More context-aware than simple code snippets but significantly less capable than Copilot's codebase indexing, which analyzes the entire project structure and dependency graph for more accurate generation.
Offers the extension for free with no subscription fee, but requires users to provide their own OpenAI API key and pay OpenAI directly for API usage on a per-request basis. The extension itself has no cost barrier, but users incur costs only when they trigger code generation, with pricing determined by OpenAI's token-based billing model.
Unique: Eliminates subscription overhead by delegating billing entirely to OpenAI, making the extension itself free but requiring users to manage their own API costs and usage monitoring.
vs alternatives: Lower barrier to entry than GitHub Copilot ($10/month) for light users, but higher total cost for heavy users and requires more financial management overhead compared to fixed-price subscription models.
Generates single-line and multi-line code suggestions in real-time as developers type, using semantic indexing of the entire codebase to retrieve relevant type definitions, function signatures, and contextual patterns. The system maintains a 1M token context window (Pro/Team tiers) that enables suggestions informed by distant code definitions and cross-file dependencies, constructed via local codebase semantic search rather than simple token-based recency. Suggestions adapt to detected coding style on Pro/Team tiers through implicit pattern learning from recent edits.
Unique: 1M token context window with codebase-wide semantic indexing enables suggestions informed by distant code definitions and cross-file patterns, versus competitors (Copilot, Tabnine) that typically use fixed context windows (4K-32K tokens) or file-local context. Claimed 250ms latency suggests optimized retrieval pipeline, though indexing mechanism and performance at scale remain undisclosed.
vs alternatives: Larger context window than GitHub Copilot (8K-32K tokens) and faster latency than unnamed competitors (250ms vs 783ms claimed), enabling suggestions on large codebases with minimal typing delay; trade-off is cloud dependency and undisclosed free tier limitations.
Provides a separate chat interface supporting multiple LLM backends (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4, others) for conversational code assistance. Users attach files, reference recent edits, and trigger compiler diagnostic uploads; the system generates diffs and applies code changes directly to the editor. Model selection is per-conversation, and $5/month in credits (included in Pro/Team) covers external model API costs; overage pricing is undisclosed. Hotkey-driven workflow enables rapid context switching between inline completion and chat.
Unique: Multi-model chat interface with per-conversation model selection and integrated diff application, combined with compiler diagnostic auto-upload. Unlike Copilot Chat (single model per tier) or standalone ChatGPT, Supermaven Chat unifies multiple LLM backends in a single hotkey-driven workflow with direct editor integration for change application.
Supermaven scores higher at 71/100 vs IA-GPTCode at 36/100. IA-GPTCode leads on ecosystem, while Supermaven is stronger on adoption and quality.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
vs alternatives: Supports multiple LLM backends (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet) in one interface with included credits, whereas GitHub Copilot Chat is single-model per tier and requires separate ChatGPT subscription for model switching; trade-off is credit limits and unknown overage pricing.
Supermaven Chat can automatically upload compiler diagnostic messages (errors, warnings) alongside code context to provide error-aware suggestions and fixes. The mechanism is described as 'automatically uploading your code together with compiler diagnostic messages,' but specific language/compiler support and the upload trigger mechanism are undisclosed. This feature is Chat-only and not available in inline completion.
Unique: Automatic compiler diagnostic upload in Chat for error-aware suggestions, versus competitors (Copilot, Tabnine) that require manual error context or have limited diagnostic integration. Supermaven's approach reduces friction but with undisclosed language/compiler support.
vs alternatives: Automatic diagnostic upload reduces manual context-gathering compared to manual copy-paste; trade-off is undisclosed language support and unclear upload trigger mechanism.
Supermaven offers a 30-day free trial of the Pro tier ($10/month), providing full access to 1M token context window, largest model, style adaptation, and $5/month chat credits. No credit card is required to start the trial (implied), and trial conversion to paid is automatic after 30 days unless cancelled. Trial terms and auto-renewal policy are not explicitly detailed.
Unique: 30-day free trial of Pro tier with full feature access (1M context, largest model, chat credits), versus competitors (Copilot 2-month free trial, Tabnine free tier only) with different trial lengths and feature access. Supermaven's approach is generous but with undisclosed auto-renewal terms.
vs alternatives: Full Pro feature access during trial compared to limited free tier; trade-off is undisclosed auto-renewal policy and potential unexpected charges if not cancelled.
Supermaven requires internet connectivity and server-side inference; no offline mode or local inference capability is mentioned or available. All code completion requests are sent to Supermaven's backend servers for processing, and responses are returned over the network. This creates a hard dependency on network connectivity and Supermaven's service availability; if the service is down or network is unavailable, code completion is not available.
Unique: Supermaven has no offline mode or local inference capability; all processing is server-side. GitHub Copilot also requires server-side inference, but Tabnine offers local inference options for some use cases. Supermaven's lack of offline capability is a significant limitation for developers with connectivity constraints.
vs alternatives: Supermaven's server-side-only approach is comparable to GitHub Copilot; Tabnine offers local inference options, making Tabnine more suitable for offline work. Supermaven's lack of offline capability is a weakness vs. Tabnine.
Analyzes recent code edits and inferred coding patterns to adapt inline suggestions to match team conventions, naming patterns, and structural preferences. The mechanism is implicit (not explicit fine-tuning) and operates only on Pro/Team tiers, suggesting pattern learning from editor activity rather than explicit configuration. Free tier uses a single base model without personalization.
Unique: Implicit style adaptation via editor activity analysis without explicit configuration, versus competitors (Copilot, Tabnine) that require manual style guides or explicit fine-tuning. Supermaven's approach is transparent to the user but also non-configurable and undisclosed in mechanism.
vs alternatives: Requires no manual style configuration compared to tools requiring explicit style guides; trade-off is lack of transparency and inability to control or export learned styles.
Delivers code suggestions to the editor inline as the developer types, with a claimed baseline latency of 250ms from keystroke to suggestion display. The system uses a cloud inference backend and local editor plugin to minimize round-trip time. Latency claim is positioned against an unnamed competitor (783ms), but methodology is undisclosed and no independent verification is provided.
Unique: Claimed 250ms latency via optimized cloud inference pipeline and editor plugin architecture, versus competitors with higher latency (783ms unnamed baseline). Actual differentiation is undisclosed; mechanism may involve request batching, model quantization, or edge caching, but specifics are not public.
vs alternatives: Faster than unnamed competitor (250ms vs 783ms claimed); trade-off is cloud dependency and unverified latency claim with no SLA or performance guarantee.
Provides native editor extensions for VS Code, JetBrains IDEs (IntelliJ IDEA, PyCharm, WebStorm, etc.), and Neovim, enabling inline suggestion rendering, hotkey-driven chat access, and compiler diagnostic integration directly within the editor. Each plugin variant is maintained separately and integrates with the editor's native autocomplete UI, keybinding system, and file context APIs.
Unique: Native plugins for three major editor ecosystems (VS Code, JetBrains, Neovim) with integrated chat and diff application, versus competitors (Copilot, Tabnine) that support broader editor ecosystems but with less deep integration in some cases. Supermaven's approach prioritizes depth over breadth.
vs alternatives: Deep integration with VS Code and JetBrains (native autocomplete UI, hotkey system) compared to web-based tools or lighter integrations; trade-off is limited editor support (no Sublime, Vim, Emacs) and undisclosed Neovim support details.
+5 more capabilities