Last updated March 2026
Compare

Cortex vs
Traditional RAG

Traditional RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) retrieves text chunks via vector similarity search. Cortex goes further — it builds a knowledge graph from your documents, extracting entities and relationships, then combines graph traversal with vector and keyword search for retrieval. The result: AI agents get context that understands connections between concepts, not just semantically similar text fragments.

How Traditional RAG Works

A standard RAG pipeline follows four steps: chunk your documents into passages, generate vector embeddings for each chunk, store them in a vector database, then retrieve the most similar chunks at query time and pass them as context to an LLM.

01

Chunk

Split documents into fixed-size text passages

02

Embed

Generate vector embeddings for each chunk

03

Retrieve

Find chunks with highest cosine similarity to the query

04

Generate

Pass retrieved chunks as context to the LLM

This works for simple question-answering, but it treats every document as isolated text. There is no understanding of entities, relationships, or how information connects across documents.

How Cortex Enhances RAG

Cortex adds a knowledge graph layer on top of vector search. Documents are not just chunked and embedded — they are analyzed for entities, relationships, and community structures that enable deeper reasoning.

Entity Extraction

Cortex automatically identifies people, organizations, concepts, and other entities from your documents using NER and LLM-powered extraction.

Relationship Mapping

Extracted entities are connected by typed relationships — who reports to whom, which projects relate to which teams, how concepts depend on each other.

GraphRAG & Community Detection

The knowledge graph is analyzed for communities and clusters, enabling multi-hop reasoning and context that spans document boundaries.

Hybrid Search

Every query combines vector similarity, BM25 keyword matching, and graph traversal. Results are merged and re-ranked with a cross-encoder for maximum relevance.

Side-by-Side Comparison

CapabilityTraditional RAGCortex
Retrieval MethodVector similarity searchHybrid: vector + keyword + graph traversal
Context QualitySemantically similar chunksEntity-aware, relationship-rich context
Entity AwarenessNone — treats text as opaque chunksAutomatic entity extraction and linking
Cross-Document ReasoningLimited to chunk overlapGraph traversal across document boundaries
Relationship DiscoveryNot supportedAutomatic relationship mapping and communities
Hallucination RiskHigher — loose semantic matchingLower — grounded in entities and citations
Setup ComplexityModerate — requires chunking, embedding, vector DBLow — single API handles full pipeline
MaintenanceManual pipeline managementManaged platform with automatic updates

When to Use What

Traditional RAG is fine when

  • You have a single document collection with simple Q&A needs
  • Documents are self-contained and don't reference each other
  • Speed matters more than context depth
  • You need a quick prototype or proof of concept

Cortex is better when

  • Multiple documents relate to each other and share entities
  • You need entity-level precision, not just passage similarity
  • AI agents need organizational context — people, projects, processes
  • Accuracy and citation support matter more than raw speed
  • You want a managed platform instead of maintaining a pipeline
FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about Cortex vs traditional RAG.

Yes. Cortex provides a complete retrieval pipeline out of the box — document ingestion, chunking, embedding, entity extraction, knowledge graph construction, and hybrid search. You can replace a traditional RAG stack with a single Cortex API integration.

Go beyond traditional RAG

See how Cortex's knowledge graph retrieval compares in practice. Try the live demo or join the waitlist.