Amp vs Codex
A side-by-side comparison of Amp and Codex, two Agent tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Amp | Codex |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Agent | Agent |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment (differs) | Cloud | Hybrid |
| Platforms (differs) | CLI, VS Code extension | CLI, VS Code extension, Web, API |
| Model support (differs) | Multi-model | Single model (proprietary) |
| Vendor (differs) | Sourcegraph | OpenAI |
| 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
Codex
Backed by OpenAI's Codex-tuned models and integrated across CLI, IDE, web, and ChatGPT — one coding agent everywhere you work.
- Local CLI, cloud, IDE, and ChatGPT
- Cloud agent runs in isolated containers
- Parallel cloud agent tasks
- Cloud agent and models are proprietary
- Best value needs a ChatGPT plan
- Token-credit billing can surprise
- Newer than rival coding agents
When to pick which
Both cover Autonomous coding agent, Terminal / CLI agent, and Code review.
Pick Amp if you need IDE integration.
- IDE integration (secondary capability)
Pick Codex if you need Sandboxed code execution and Code generation.
- Sandboxed code execution (primary capability)
- Code generation (primary capability)
They also differ on:
- Deployment
- Cloud · Hybrid
- Platforms
- CLI, VS Code extension · CLI, VS Code extension, Web, API
- Model support
- Multi-model · Single model (proprietary)