Both the Restricted Hopfield Network (RHN) and Dense Associative Memory (DAM) are derived from the classical Hopfield Neural Network (HNN), but they improve upon HNN using different mechanisms. This paper presents a comparative analysis of RHN and DAM with respect to storage capacity, time complexity, training efficiency, and retrieval from incomplete or noisy patterns. The analysis reveals that RHN and DAM use different mechanisms for storing patterns. RHN, trained using the Subspace Rotation Algorithm (SRA), exhibits better time complexity than DAM, which is trained using the Energy-based Algorithm (EBA). Furthermore, in practice, RHN requires significantly less time than DAM to memorize the same number of patterns, as DAM needs more epochs to converge. The experimental results demonstrate that when storing 1,000 character patterns (825 bits), RHN with two hidden layers outperforms DAM in terms of retrieval from noisy and incomplete patterns. When memorizing 10, 50, and 100 patterns from both the MNIST and Fashion MNIST datasets, RHN shows a slight advantage over DAM in retrieval from incomplete and noisy patterns. However, the performance of both models degrades as the number of hidden nodes or stored patterns increases. The link to the source code: https://github.com/Developer2046/rhn_dam.