Neuralink N1 vs Synchron Stentrode: Two BCI Implants, Two Philosophies
More channels or less surgery — the implant choice is rarely both. N1 maximises one. Stentrode minimises the other.
Both devices are investigational implantable BCIs in active US clinical trials, but they could not be more different. Neuralink's N1 is a 1,024-channel intracortical device implanted via craniectomy by a robot. Synchron's Stentrode is a 16-channel endovascular array delivered through a catheter in the jugular vein with no skull opening. N1 is the bandwidth play; Stentrode is the scalability play. Neither is on sale.
Published · Updated
Side-by-side specs
| Specification | N1 Implant | Stentrode |
|---|---|---|
| Classification | ||
| Invasiveness | invasive | minimally-invasive |
| Primary modality | single-unit | LFP |
| Direction | read | read |
| Electrodes | ||
| Total channels | 1024 | 16 |
| Recording channels | 1024 | 16 |
| Electrode type | penetrating-shank | stentrode-mesh |
| Prep time | — | — |
| Acquisition | ||
| Sampling rate | 18600–19300 Hz | — |
| ADC resolution | 10 bit | — |
| Connectivity | ||
| Protocols | bluetooth-le, transcranial-inductive | transcranial-inductive, proprietary-rf |
| Power | ||
| Battery life (active) | — | — |
| Physical | ||
| Weight | — | — |
| Software | ||
| Raw data access | No | No |
| LSL support | — | — |
| SDK | ||
| Has SDK | No | No |
| Open source | No | No |
| Regulatory | ||
| FDA status | investigational-device-exemption | investigational-device-exemption |
| CE mark | No | — |
| Pricing | ||
| MSRP | — | — |
| Subscription required | — | — |
| Warranty | — | — |
Verdict by axis
channel-count
N1 Implant
1,024 vs 16 — N1 has roughly 64× the channel count of Stentrode.
Confidence: high
signal-quality
N1 Implant
Penetrating intracortical electrodes resolve individual neuron action potentials. Vascular ECoG sees aggregated cortical activity through the vessel wall — useful, but lower-resolution.
Confidence: high
invasiveness
Stentrode
Stentrode requires no craniectomy. Delivery is through the jugular vein under fluoroscopy in a procedure neurointerventionalists already perform daily.
Confidence: high
safety
Stentrode
SWITCH and COMMAND have a strong reported safety record without explant. N1's first patient experienced significant thread retraction in the months after implant.
Confidence: medium
reversibility
Stentrode
Endovascular devices can in principle be removed by the same vascular route. Penetrating cortical threads cannot be cleanly explanted without further injury.
Confidence: medium
research-credibility
Stentrode
Stentrode has peer-reviewed clinical results in JAMA Neurology (2023). Neuralink has not published equivalent peer-reviewed trial data as of 2026-05.
Confidence: high
capabilities-cursor
tie
Both have demonstrated cursor control in humans. N1's bandwidth ceiling is higher; Stentrode's is closer to the demonstrated state of the art today.
Confidence: medium
capabilities-typing
N1 Implant
High-WPM typing has been shown on dense intracortical arrays (Utah / N1-class). Stentrode's 16 channels likely cap meaningful character-level decoding well below those rates.
Confidence: low
capabilities-prosthetic
N1 Implant
Multi-DOF prosthetic / robotic-arm control has been demonstrated on dense intracortical arrays — not yet on Stentrode.
Confidence: medium
availability
tie
Neither device is for sale. Access requires enrolling in PRIME or COMMAND.
Confidence: high
stimulation
tie
Both are read-only as currently studied.
Confidence: high
ecosystem
N1 Implant
Neuralink has more public engineering output (custom robot, ASIC, tooling). Synchron's stack is mostly internal.
Confidence: low
Pros & cons
N1 Implant
In favor
- 1,024 recording channels — highest in any clinical-stage BCI
- Single-unit resolution; 18-19 kHz sampling
- Custom on-implant ASIC with spike detection
- Fully wireless via BLE — no transcutaneous connector
- Robot-assisted insertion targets reproducibility
Against
- Requires craniectomy and a custom surgical robot
- First-patient thread retraction event raised durability questions
- No peer-reviewed clinical trial paper yet (as of 2026-05)
- Hardware specs largely proprietary
Stentrode
In favor
- No craniectomy — delivered through the jugular vein
- Implanted by interventional neuroradiologists already trained in stent work
- Strong peer-reviewed safety record (JAMA Neurology 2023)
- First permanently-implanted BCI under a US FDA IDE
- Likely faster path to broad clinical deployment if endpoints continue to hold
Against
- Only 16 channels — orders of magnitude below intracortical devices
- Vascular ECoG is lower-resolution than penetrating recording
- Limited to motor-cortex regions accessible via the sagittal sinus
- No on-implant compute — decoding lives outside the body
Recommendations by use case
| Use case | Pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Cursor + click for severe paralysis (today) | Stentrode | Stentrode's published clinical data covers exactly this paradigm in patients living at home. |
| High-bandwidth communication (typing > 30 WPM) | N1 Implant | Penetrating channels are required for the population coding densities seen in Utah / N1-class results. |
| Robotic-arm / prosthetic control | N1 Implant | Multi-DOF continuous decoding has been demonstrated on dense cortical arrays, not on Stentrode. |
| Speech decoding | N1 Implant | Speech BCIs to date use dense penetrating arrays; vascular ECoG is unproven for this paradigm. |
| Patients ineligible for craniotomy | Stentrode | Endovascular delivery sidesteps surgical risks craniectomy patients may not tolerate. |
| Maximum surgical reversibility | Stentrode | Endovascular devices can in principle be retrieved via the same route. |
| Hospital-scale deployability | Stentrode | Neurointerventionalists exist at thousands of hospitals; Neuralink's surgical robot does not. |
| Long-term recording stability research | Stentrode | Vascular contact may avoid the gliosis that degrades penetrating arrays over months/years. |
| Single-neuron / spike-sorting research | N1 Implant | Vascular ECoG cannot resolve individual action potentials. |
| Buying one for personal use | Neither | Both are investigational devices in clinical trials. Neither is purchasable. |
Frequently asked
›Can I get either of these implanted today?
Only by enrolling in an active clinical trial. Neuralink runs the PRIME study (NCT06429735, US). Synchron runs COMMAND in the US (NCT05035823) and previously SWITCH in Australia (NCT03834857). Neither device is FDA-cleared for general use.
›Why does Stentrode have so many fewer channels?
It's a different access route. The Stentrode is shaped like a vascular stent and sits inside the superior sagittal sinus — a vein on top of motor cortex. The number of contacts that fit on a stent (~16) is constrained by the physical device that must be deliverable through a catheter. Neuralink's N1 sits inside the cortex itself with no such constraint.
›Has either device let someone control a computer?
Yes, both. Synchron's SWITCH study (Australia, 4 patients) demonstrated text messaging, online shopping, and digital device control. Neuralink's first PRIME patients have demonstrated cursor + click on macOS and Windows in public videos.
›Is Stentrode safer than N1?
Stentrode has a longer track record and a peer-reviewed clinical safety paper (Mitchell et al., JAMA Neurology 2023). N1's first patient experienced significant thread retraction in the months after implant. Both remain under active FDA IDE oversight; long-term comparative safety data does not yet exist.
›Which one will reach commercial approval first?
Stentrode's procedural model (existing neurointerventional workflow, smaller surgical footprint) is widely seen as the faster path to a broad clinical indication. N1's path is harder but the bandwidth ceiling is higher. Both are pre-PMA as of 2026-05.
Bottom line
These devices are not direct substitutes. N1 is a high-bandwidth research bet on penetrating cortical recording. Stentrode is a scalability bet on a procedure that already fits inside hospital workflows. Both are essential to the field; the right answer for any patient depends on what the BCI needs to do and how much surgical risk is acceptable.