| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Starting Price | — | $10/mo |
| Capabilities | 5 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Accepts pasted error messages and code snippets through a VS Code status bar modal interface, sends them to OpenAI's ChatGPT API, and returns natural language explanations of what the error means and why it occurred. The extension operates as a thin wrapper around ChatGPT's conversational API with no local parsing or semantic analysis of errors — all interpretation is delegated to the LLM.
Unique: Integrates ChatGPT error explanation directly into VS Code's status bar as a modal popup, eliminating the need to switch to a browser or separate tool during debugging workflows. Unlike web-based error lookup tools, it maintains context within the IDE.
vs alternatives: Faster context-switching than web search for error explanations, but lacks the structured error database and community solutions of Stack Overflow or official documentation.
Takes error messages and code snippets provided by the developer and uses ChatGPT to generate proposed code fixes or remediation steps. The extension passes the user's input directly to OpenAI's API without analyzing code structure, AST parsing, or semantic understanding — all fix generation is LLM-based and unvalidated.
Unique: Embeds ChatGPT's code generation capability directly into the VS Code debugging workflow via a modal interface, avoiding the friction of copying errors to a separate ChatGPT tab. However, it provides no local code analysis or validation — purely a convenience wrapper.
vs alternatives: More convenient than manually querying ChatGPT in a browser, but less capable than GitHub Copilot or Codeium which provide inline suggestions with codebase awareness and real-time validation.
Accepts arbitrary developer questions (not limited to bugs despite marketing focus) through the VS Code status bar modal and routes them to ChatGPT's API for general conversational responses. The extension acts as a thin UI wrapper with no question routing, intent classification, or specialized handling — all questions receive the same generic ChatGPT treatment.
Unique: Provides a lightweight modal interface for ChatGPT queries without leaving VS Code, reducing window-switching friction. Unlike dedicated AI coding assistants, it makes no attempt to understand code context or provide specialized responses — it's a generic chat wrapper.
vs alternatives: Simpler and lighter-weight than full-featured AI coding assistants like Copilot, but lacks specialized capabilities like codebase indexing, inline suggestions, or context-aware responses.
Provides a VS Code status bar button that opens a modal dialog for text input, sends the input to ChatGPT's API, and displays the response in the same modal. The implementation uses VS Code's native modal/input box APIs with no custom UI framework — responses are rendered as plain text in a popup window that blocks further VS Code interaction until dismissed.
Unique: Uses VS Code's native status bar and modal APIs for a minimal, zero-configuration UI that requires no custom UI framework or styling. This keeps the extension lightweight but sacrifices rich formatting and advanced interaction patterns.
vs alternatives: Simpler and lighter than extensions using custom webview panels (like GitHub Copilot Chat), but less feature-rich and more blocking to the developer workflow.
Integrates with OpenAI's ChatGPT API to send user queries and receive responses. The extension handles API authentication, request formatting, and response parsing, but provides no model selection, parameter tuning, or fallback mechanisms. All requests use a fixed ChatGPT model (version unspecified) with default parameters — no configuration options are exposed to users.
Unique: Provides direct, zero-configuration integration with OpenAI's ChatGPT API from within VS Code without requiring users to manage API calls or authentication manually. However, it exposes no configuration options, model selection, or advanced features — purely a pass-through wrapper.
vs alternatives: Simpler setup than building custom ChatGPT integrations, but less flexible than frameworks like LangChain or direct API clients that allow model selection, parameter tuning, and advanced features.
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 Stacker at 30/100. Stacker 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