ThreadRecall vs Screenpipe: which local AI memory tool is right?
Screenpipe records your screen and mic. ThreadRecall captures your AI conversations. Both are local-first. The right choice depends on how much of your digital life you actually want in the index.
Short answer
Use Screenpipe if you want a broad, always-on record of what happened on your computer. Use ThreadRecall if the thing you keep losing is your AI conversation history: the Claude thread where you chose a product direction, the Codex session where you fixed a bug, the ChatGPT draft you forgot to save.
The products overlap in philosophy - local-first memory - but not in capture scope. That scope difference changes privacy, disk usage, setup, and daily usefulness.
What Screenpipe is
Screenpipe describes itself as an AI assistant that records your screen and mic 24/7 on your own machine. Its GitHub page positions it as local, private, and open source, with support for macOS, Windows, and Linux.
That makes it a strong choice for people who want something close to a full computer memory. It can help answer questions like: what happened in the meeting, what was on my screen, what did I say, what app was open, what did I see and forget?
What ThreadRecall is
ThreadRecall is narrower. It captures conversations from supported AI tools: Claude, ChatGPT, Codex, Gemini, and Perplexity. It does not record your full screen. It does not record your mic. It saves the conversation content that you were actively shaping with an AI assistant.
That narrower capture model is better for people whose real work now happens in AI chats. If your projects keep restarting from scratch because yesterday's thread is buried or compacted, you do not need full surveillance of your desktop. You need the AI work itself to become searchable memory.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | ThreadRecall | Screenpipe |
|---|---|---|
| Primary capture | AI conversations | Screen and mic activity |
| Best query | "What did Claude say about the pricing decision?" | "What happened in the meeting last Tuesday?" |
| Privacy surface | Lower incidental capture because it ignores non-AI screens | Wider incidental capture because it watches the desktop and audio |
| Storage profile | Mostly text | Screen frames, OCR, transcripts, metadata |
| Setup style | Mac app, local helper, accessibility permission | Power-user tool with app, integrations, APIs, and configurable agents |
| Platforms | Current beta: Apple Silicon Mac | macOS, Windows, Linux |
| Open source | No | Yes, according to Screenpipe's GitHub page |
| Obsidian | Built-in Markdown export to your vault | Possible through workflows and configuration |
The decision guide
Choose Screenpipe if you want to capture life around the work
Screenpipe is more appropriate if your main pain is reconstructing meetings, finding something you saw in a browser, or letting agents operate from a wide record of screen and audio context. That breadth is useful, especially for technical users who want APIs and full control.
Choose ThreadRecall if you want to preserve the thinking itself
ThreadRecall is for people who use AI as a thinking partner. The product assumes that the most reusable context is not every screen you glanced at, but the conversation where you reasoned through a decision, draft, bug, strategy, or research path.
Can they coexist?
Yes. They solve adjacent problems. A power user could run Screenpipe for broad computer recall and ThreadRecall for a focused, portable AI conversation archive. Most people should start with the narrower tool that matches the pain they actually feel.
ThreadRecall keeps your AI conversations searchable and local, without recording everything else on your Mac.
