Claude Code vs Amp: Which Coding Agent Should You Use in 2026?

Short answer: Claude Code is a terminal-first agent that runs only on Claude models and bills through a Claude subscription. Amp, from Sourcegraph, is a multi-model agent that picks frontier models for you, bills pay-as-you-go credits with no markup, and shares threads across your team by default. Pick Claude Code if you want deep single-vendor control and flat pricing. Pick Amp if you want model-agnostic convenience and team-visible threads.

Both are excellent agents. The choice is about how you want to pay, who picks the model, and whether your team shares work.

# Claude Code (Claude subscription or API)
curl -fsSL https://claude.ai/install.sh | bash
claude

# Amp (pay-as-you-go credits, multi-model)
npm install -g @sourcegraph/amp
amp

The core difference

Claude Code is Anthropic's agent. It runs in your terminal, drives Claude models (Opus 4.8, Sonnet 4.6, Haiku 4.5), and bills through a Claude Pro or Max subscription (or API credits). You configure it with a CLAUDE.md file, extend it with subagents, skills, slash commands, hooks, and MCP servers, and you stay on one vendor end to end.

Amp is Sourcegraph's agent. It runs as a CLI, an editor extension (VS Code, JetBrains, Neovim, Zed), and a web app for sharing threads. Its defining choice is that it picks the model for you. You select a mode (Smart, Deep, or Rush) and Amp routes to the frontier model it judges best, then upgrades that default as new models ship. You pay pay-as-you-go credits, not a subscription.

Where Claude Code wins

Single-vendor consistency is the headline. Claude Code runs Claude models only, so its behavior, context handling, and tool use are tuned end to end for one family. You control which Claude model runs by tier, and the 1M-token context on Opus 4.8 holds a large repo without losing track of what it read early on.

Extensibility goes deeper. Beyond MCP and subagents (which Amp also has), Claude Code adds skills, hooks, and slash commands. Hooks let you run your own scripts on agent events, which is how teams enforce lint gates, run tests automatically, or block risky commands. That surface area is wider than Amp's today.

Flat pricing helps heavy users. A Claude Max plan bundles a lot of usage into a fixed monthly cost, so a developer running long sessions every day often pays less than they would on metered tokens. If you do not want to watch a credit meter, the subscription model removes that anxiety. See the Claude Code overview for the full feature set.

The config habit is already widespread. According to the State of Claude Code 2026 analysis, 85% of public Claude Code repos ship a CLAUDE.md but only 25% define a subagent. Most teams already have the config file Claude Code reads, and Amp reads it too when no AGENTS.md exists.

Where Amp wins

Model-agnostic routing is the real draw. You do not pin yourself to one vendor. Amp's Smart mode runs on Claude Opus 4.8, Deep mode runs on GPT-5.5 for heavier reasoning, and Rush mode runs a faster GPT-5.5 for small tasks. When one model falls short, Amp can escalate to a stronger one as an oracle. You get frontier quality without managing the plumbing.

Pay-as-you-go has no floor. There is no subscription. Amp passes provider API pricing through with no markup for individuals and non-enterprise teams, and the minimum top-up is $5. For light or occasional use, you pay only for what you run, which can be cheaper than any monthly plan.

Shared threads are built for teams. In Amp, a thread captures every message, tool call, and edit, and threads are shared by default across a workspace. Teammates can read what worked, reuse it, and drop an Amp link into a code review for context. Claude Code has no native equivalent to this team-visible history.

Editor reach is broad. Amp ships first-party extensions for VS Code, JetBrains, Neovim, and Zed alongside its CLI, so the agent meets you where you already edit. Claude Code is terminal-first with a desktop and mobile companion.

Honest tradeoffs

Amp's convenience has a cost. Because Amp picks the model for you, you give up granular control. If you specifically want a given model on a given task, the mode abstraction can get in the way. And metered billing means cost is variable, so a runaway autonomous task can spend more than you expected.

Claude Code's single vendor is a limit too. You cannot reach for GPT or Gemini inside Claude Code when a task suits them better. You are betting on Claude models being the right tool, which they often are, but not always.

Neither tool gives subagents a shared context window. In both, spawned subagents work in isolation and report back rather than talking to each other live, so very large parallel workflows still need orchestration on your side.

Which should you choose

A common pattern: solo developers who want zero subscription overhead and multi-model flexibility start with Amp, while teams standardizing on Claude and wanting hooks, skills, and flat pricing run Claude Code. They are not mutually exclusive, and Amp even reads your CLAUDE.md, so trying both costs you little setup.

If your goal is to ship a real product rather than evaluate agents, the Build This Now Code Kit is a $29 one-time harness (no subscription) that runs on Claude Code for Next.js and Supabase, with planning agents, a build pipeline, adversarial evaluators, quality gates, and auth, payments, and a database wired in.

FAQ

What is Amp by Sourcegraph?

Amp is Sourcegraph's agentic coding tool. It runs as a CLI, an editor extension for VS Code, JetBrains, Neovim, and Zed, and a web app for sharing threads. It picks frontier models for you across Smart, Deep, and Rush modes and bills pay-as-you-go credits with zero markup on provider API pricing for individuals.

Does Amp let me pick the model?

Not in the granular way Claude Code does. Amp gives you modes (Smart, Deep, Rush) and routes each to the frontier model it judges best, then upgrades those defaults as new models ship. It can also escalate to a stronger model as an oracle when needed. Claude Code, by contrast, runs only Claude models and lets you choose the tier (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku).

Is Amp cheaper than Claude Code?

For light use, often yes, because Amp has no subscription floor and passes provider pricing through with no markup (minimum $5 top-up). For heavy daily use, Claude Code's flat Max plan can be cheaper than metered tokens. It comes down to how much you run per day.

Does Amp work with CLAUDE.md?

Yes. Amp's main config file is AGENTS.md, but if no AGENTS.md exists in a directory, Amp reads your CLAUDE.md instead. So an existing Claude Code project gives Amp useful guidance with no extra setup.

Can I just use both?

Yes. Many developers keep Claude Code for single-vendor consistency, hooks, and flat pricing, and use Amp when they want multi-model routing or shared team threads. Because Amp reads CLAUDE.md, switching between them is low-friction.

Related reading

• The 7 best Claude Code alternatives
• Claude Code vs Cursor
• Claude Code vs Aider
• What is Claude Code