Amp vs Claude Code
A side-by-side comparison of Amp and Claude Code, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Category (differs) | Agent | IDE |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment (differs) | Cloud | Local |
| Platforms (differs) | CLI, VS Code extension | macOS, Windows, Linux, CLI, VS Code extension, Web |
| Model support (differs) | Multi-model | Single model (proprietary) |
| Vendor (differs) | Sourcegraph | Anthropic |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Amp
Shareable, searchable agent 'threads' for the whole team, billed pay-as-you-go at zero markup over model prices.
- Zero-markup pay-as-you-go pricing
- Shareable/searchable team threads
- Routes across frontier models
- Works in terminal and editors
- Closed source
- Usage-metered costs can be unpredictable
- Newer than Cursor/Copilot
- Best value tied to Sourcegraph workflows
Claude Code
Ships the same agent across CLI, IDE, desktop, and web — reads the spec, writes the diff, runs tests, opens the PR.
- Strong autonomous multi-step coding
- MCP and subagents support
- Runs on API key or Pro/Max plan
- Anthropic models only
- Token usage can get expensive
- Terminal-first learning curve
When to pick which
Across the signals we compare, Amp and Claude Code differ on deployment, platforms, and model support:
- Deployment
- Cloud · Local
- Platforms
- CLI, VS Code extension · macOS, Windows, Linux, CLI, VS Code extension, Web
- Model support
- Multi-model · Single model (proprietary)
Their capability lists differ in recorded depth — compare the full lists above before deciding.