GILD verdict
Choose Claude Code if you need approvals on by default, IDE extensions, and spend limits on a Team plan.
Choose Amp if engineers will delegate to parallel cloud agents on models picked across vendors. Amp's orbs also run in Claude Code mode on a Claude subscription. Pilot both on one repository and compare accepted changes and spend.
Claude Code is the better default for teams that work in their IDE and pay for Claude plans. Amp suits engineers who send threads to cloud orbs billed by the minute, on models from Anthropic, OpenAI, and other providers. Both read repositories, edit files, run terminal commands, and offer cloud sessions. Amp threads can also run locally or on your own runners. Since October 10, 2026, Amp runs Claude Code on a Claude Pro or Max plan.
What teams report
Left or turned down 1
Hornet
After Amp announced that coding agents were dead, Hornet migrated off Amp to Codex and Claude Code, its CEO wrote on Mar 25, 2026.
“…so we migrated off Amp to primitives closer to the models (codex and claude code)…”
Jo Kristian Bergum, CEO, HornetX, , post
Run both 2
Indeed
In the talk DX published in June 2026, Indeed's roughly 2,000 engineers worked mostly in Claude Code, with Amp at the bottom of a mix that also holds Cursor and Windsurf, often several at once.
“And if you’re interested, our breakdown rate, we’re mostly Claude Code, a little bit Cursor, some Windsurf, and then down at the bottom, Amp. If you actually add up these percentages, it’s definitely more than 100%. So we also see that our devs are using multiple tools at the same time.”
Michael Redding, Principal Product Manager, IndeedDX Engineering Enablement podcast, , episode Changelog
Stacoviak ran Amp and Claude Code side by side on a long-running project, with a product-manager agent reviewing their output, and used Claude Code partly because it cost him less (Sep 17, 2025).
“...in this case one of them was Amp and the other one was Claude Code, because that one's cheaper for me. You're really expensive, by the way.”
Adam Stacoviak, Co-founder and podcast host, ChangelogChangelog, , around 52:11
Choosing between Amp and Claude Code
Choose Amp if
- You want Amp to pick and pair models per task, with a second model checking plans.
- Engineers will start many cloud agents and follow them from the web or a phone.
- Engineers will pay with their own keys or subscriptions, including Claude Code mode inside Amp on a Claude Pro or Max plan.
Choose Claude Code if
- You want the model vendor's own agent, with approvals on by default and managed permission rules.
- Engineers work in VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, or a desktop app, where Amp has had no extension since March 2026.
- You need team spend limits on a standard Team plan.
Side by side
| Dimension | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Where it runs | CLI, web app, macOS, iOS, and Android apps, runners on your own machines, and orbs | Terminal, VS Code and JetBrains extensions, a desktop app, the web, mobile, Slack, and CI |
| Models | Chosen by Amp per mode, for example Opus 5.5 in medium and GPT-6 Astra in high, with an Oracle in every mode | Anthropic Claude models |
| Individual priceList prices in US dollars. The plans count included usage in different units. | Hobby: free with your own keys or subscriptions; Individual (Megawatt): US$20 per month | Claude Pro: US$20 per month, or US$17 per month billed annually |
| Team price | Teams workspace at no extra charge, each member on Hobby, Megawatt, or Gigawatt at US$200 per month; Enterprise custom | Team Standard seat: US$25 per seat per month, or US$20 billed annually; Enterprise US$20 per seat per month billed annually, plus usage at API rates |
| Beyond the plan | Paid credits at providers' API prices, no markup outside Enterprise, plus orb minutes | Plan usage resets on five-hour and weekly windows; API billing at token rates |
| Approvals | None by default; a plugin can allow, reject, or modify each tool call | Permission modes from read-only until approved to Auto, with managed permission rules |
| Cloud agents | Orbs: a cloud machine per thread, billed by the minute, with portals to the running app | Claude Code on the web runs sessions in Anthropic's cloud |
| Using one inside the other | Claude Code mode runs Anthropic's agent inside Amp on a Claude Pro or Max plan; orbs still bill to Amp | Not applicable |
What practitioners report, side by side
Each product's figures come from its own practitioners, for the group you pick.
Overall signal
All practitioners rate Amp +69, 24 points above Claude Code at +45. Most of the gap is in praise, with 42 of Amp's 56 sources positive against 64 of Claude Code's 110. Amp has 3 negative and Claude Code 13.
The score counts the authors from all practitioners that take a side, one vote each with their latest view, and is how far positive votes lead negative ones, per 100 votes, so Amp's +69 rests on votes split 38 positive, 10 mixed and 3 negative and Claude Code's +45 on 60, 32 and 13.
A lead of a fifth of the votes reads positive and a lead of half strong positive, with the same lines below zero. The dots show each source, positive, mixed, negative. Use a task pilot to measure accepted work and review time.
Footprint on the Agentic Software Development stack
They differ on three of 12 layers. Claude Code owns two that Amp does not. Coverage is each product's placement on this stack, as its product page shows it. Core is a job the product owns; Supports and Touches are jobs it helps with. Coverage says nothing about how well a product does them.
| Layer | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Build | ||
| Codebase context | Supports | Core |
| Tool execution | Supports | Core |
| Ship | ||
| Source control | Supports | Touches |
The 9 layers where they match
| Layer | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Plan | ||
| Work planning | Supports | Supports |
| Build | ||
| Coding | Core | Core |
| Agent runtime | Core | Core |
| Validate | ||
| Debugging | Supports | Supports |
| Testing | Supports | Supports |
| Code review | Supports | Supports |
| Application security | Touches | Touches |
| Ship | ||
| CI/CD | Touches | Touches |
| Operate | ||
| Observability | Touches | Touches |
What practitioners praise
Among all practitioners, Claude Code alone has five praise themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Multi-Step Execution and Codebase Understanding lead, at 17 of 19 and 16 of 16. Of the two themes both carry, Value for Money differs most. It is praised in 3 of the 9 Amp sources that discuss it, against 9 of 14 for Claude Code. Amp alone has four praise themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Result Quality and Oracle & Model Routing lead, at 15 of 16 and 14 of 14.
| Praised for | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Developer Experience | 14 of 17 | 15 of 21 |
| Value for Money | 3 of 9 | 9 of 14 |
| Result Quality | 15 of 16 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Oracle & Model Routing | 14 of 14 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Threads & Handoff | 13 of 13 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Orbs & Cloud Agents | 12 of 12 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Multi-Step Execution | Not a theme in its sources | 17 of 19 |
| Codebase Understanding | Not a theme in its sources | 16 of 16 |
| Large Refactors | Not a theme in its sources | 9 of 10 |
| Enterprise Administration | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 8 |
| Stability | Not a theme in its sources | 1 of 6 |
Each count is the sources that praise a theme, or raise it as a concern, out of those that discuss it. A row pairs the two products when both carry a theme under the same or an equivalent name.
A count ending in "so far" has under 5 sources from 3 authors among all practitioners. "Not a theme in its sources" means GILD found no theme of that name in that product's sources.
What practitioners raise as concerns
Among all practitioners, Claude Code alone has seven concern themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Requires Strong Review and Context Management lead, at 26 of 40 and 17 of 28. Both carry Usage / Cost. It is raised in 11 of the 26 Amp sources that discuss it, against 19 of 31 for Claude Code.
| Raised as a concern | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Usage / Cost | 11 of 26 | 19 of 31 |
| Requires Strong Review | 1 of 3 so far | 26 of 40 |
| Context Management | Not a theme in its sources | 17 of 28 |
| Inconsistent Results on Large Tasks | Not a theme in its sources | 16 of 18 |
| Permissions & Safety | Not a theme in its sources | 10 of 20 |
| Reliability | Not a theme in its sources | 9 of 10 |
| Needs Close Steering | 1 of 3 so far | 7 of 9 |
| Day-to-Day Friction | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 6 |
15 sources
- Amp pricing
- Amp docs: Pricing
- Amp: Modes & models
- Amp docs: The Dial
- Amp docs: Orbs
- Amp docs: Orb sizes & costs
- Amp docs: Tools
- Amp news: Use Your Claude Plan in Amp (Oct 10, 2026)
- Amp docs: AGENTS.md
- Claude Code docs: Overview
- Claude Code docs: Platforms
- Claude Code docs: Costs
- Claude Code docs: Security
- Claude Code docs: Memory
- Claude pricing