ChatGPT remembers your name and tone beautifully. Stop being its long-term memory.
ChatGPT memory is a capped list of facts that lives inside one app — it starts thin, fills up, and Claude never hears a word of it. Naumu is the long-term brain your assistants write to over MCP: dump your pile, it builds a real connected map, and your ChatGPT writes the same graph Claude reads — as you, and reversible.
Why it holds up
One portable brain your assistants read and write.
Your AI authors it, not just recalls it
ChatGPT memory updates its own list inside ChatGPT. Over MCP your assistant writes to a real graph that belongs to you — directly and reversibly — and Claude reads the exact same brain the next morning. One memory, every assistant, not a silo per vendor.
Every answer carries a receipt
ChatGPT can’t show you where a remembered fact came from. Naumu stamps every node with its source and the timestamp it was captured — click any claim and the row it came from opens, including the ones your assistant wrote.
Keep ChatGPT. Connect it. Run both.
You don’t leave ChatGPT — you point it at Naumu over MCP (setup at /docs/chatgpt). Keep its built-in memory for tone and chat feel; let Naumu hold the structured, cross-assistant brain. Switch fully only once it’s earned it.
The honest comparison
Where each tool actually wins.
A rigged table fools no one. Here’s the real split — including the rows ChatGPT memory wins outright.
Shared across Claude AND ChatGPT
No — memory lives inside ChatGPT; Claude never hears it.
Both read and write the same graph over MCP, as you.
Writes back to a real knowledge base
Updates its own memory list; you can’t point it at a graph.
Two-way over MCP — direct and reversible; in-app, the agent proposes a before/after you confirm.
Structure
A running list of remembered facts.
A real typed graph — entities and relationships you can open, traverse, and ask.
Where a fact came from
No — you can’t see the source of a remembered fact.
Every fact traces to its source, with when it was captured or last updated.
Capacity
Fills up — you ration which fact earns the slot.
Your graph grows with you; no memory slot to ration (free tier is capped).
Carrying context across chats
Within one ChatGPT, yes — but starts thin and you top it up.
One persistent graph — the same brain every session, every assistant.
A failed write tells you it failed
n/a — there’s no external write to fail.
A failed MCP write surfaces an error on that turn; the agent never ends pretending it wrote.
Owned and portable
Lives inside ChatGPT, on OpenAI’s terms; leaves when you do.
Yours and vendor-neutral — swap which assistant you trust without re-teaching it your life.
Remembering your name, tone, and how you like answers
Best-in-class — and the right, free tool for exactly that.
Overkill if personal chat feel is all you want.
Zero setup — open a tab and start, nothing to wire
Nothing to connect; memory just turns on inside ChatGPT.
You connect an assistant once over MCP (setup at /docs/chatgpt).
Trying it
Already on if you use ChatGPT — nothing to try separately.
No signup to try; nothing saved until you keep, so the trial costs you nothing.
If all you want is for ChatGPT to remember your name, your tone, and how you like answers phrased — its built-in memory is the right, free tool, and you shouldn’t bolt a knowledge graph onto that. Naumu is for the other thing: re-pasting your context every morning, watching “memory is full,” and wishing Claude knew what you told ChatGPT. That gap is what it’s built for.
FAQ
Adding Naumu to ChatGPT, honestly.
Compare Naumu with other tools
Stop being the clipboard. Start asking.
Drop your pile or bring your ChatGPT export, connect your assistant once over MCP, and give your AI a brain it can actually keep — and write to.