Compare / Aider vs Amp
Head-to-head
Aider vs Amp.
Side-by-side on ratings, pricing, pros, cons, and the honest take on which to pick. Both are in our coding agent category — direct competitors.
| Aider | Amp | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Category | Coding Agent | Coding Agent |
| Tech level | developer | developer |
| Open source | Yes (Apache 2.0) | No |
| Pricing | Free. You bring your own API keys (Anthropic, OpenAI, DeepSeek, Gemini, etc.). 4.2× more token-efficient than Claude Code on identical tasks — verified via independent benchmarks. | Free tier with usage limits. Paid tiers via Sourcegraph subscription. Bundled with Sourcegraph Code Search for teams already on the platform. |
| Best for | Cost-conscious developers, open-source purists, anyone who wants to mix Claude, GPT, DeepSeek, and Gemini in one workflow. Strong for surgical refactoring and audit-friendly git workflows. | Engineering teams already paying for Sourcegraph Code Search who want to add an AI agent that reuses the existing codebase index. Free tier is generous enough for individual evaluation. |
| Not for | Teams that need maximum accuracy on complex tasks (Aider lands around 85%) or rely on enterprise-grade vendor support. | Teams not on Sourcegraph — the standalone story is less differentiated than Claude Code or Augment. Builders who want a simpler CLI experience. |
Our verdict on Aider
The open-source pick. BYOK, switch models mid-session, use 4x fewer tokens than Claude Code. Trade-off: lower accuracy and a smaller community.
Full Aider review →Our verdict on Amp
Sourcegraph's agentic coding tool built on years of code-search investment. Strong for teams already on Sourcegraph; less compelling as a standalone.
Full Amp review →Aider
What works
- Free — pay only your model API costs (BYOK)
- Works with any major LLM — Claude, GPT, DeepSeek, Gemini, local models
- 4.2× more token-efficient than Claude Code on identical tasks (verified)
- Git-native: every change auto-commits, full audit trail, easy rollback
- Open source (Apache 2.0) — fork it, audit it, self-host it
- Editor-agnostic — terminal-based, works alongside any editor
What doesn't
- ~85% accuracy on technical benchmarks (vs ~91%+ for Claude Code or Cursor)
- Smaller community — fewer plugins, integrations, examples
- No native MCP server or hooks support (extensibility limited)
- Single-agent only — no subagent coordination
- Depends on third-party model provider uptime
Amp
What works
- Built on Sourcegraph's mature code-search and indexing infrastructure
- Free tier with meaningful usage allowance
- Strong codebase-context story without separate indexing setup
- Native integration with Sourcegraph Code Search
- Sourcegraph's enterprise compliance story (SOC 2, on-prem options) carries over
What doesn't
- Standalone value less compelling than Claude Code or Augment for non-Sourcegraph teams
- Newer to agentic coding than competitors with longer track records
- Smaller community vs Cursor or Copilot
- Locked into Sourcegraph as the indexing/context layer
- Best fit narrows to teams already paying for Sourcegraph
Which to pick
These two are closely matched. Don't pick on overall rating — pick on use case. Aider for cost-conscious developers, open-source purists, anyone who wants to mix claude, gpt, deepseek, and gemini in one workflow. strong for surgical refactoring and audit-friendly git workflows. Amp for engineering teams already paying for sourcegraph code search who want to add an ai agent that reuses the existing codebase index. free tier is generous enough for individual evaluation.
Honest middle: most serious operators end up using more than one tool. If you're early in your AI agent journey, our five-question picker recommends a starting platform from your specific situation.
Common questions
Aider vs Amp — which should I pick?
Aider and Amp are closely matched (we rate them 4.0/5 and 4.0/5). Pick by use case rather than overall score: Aider for cost-conscious developers, open-source purists, anyone who wants to mix claude, gpt, deepseek, and gemini in one workflow. strong for surgical refactoring and audit-friendly git workflows.; Amp for engineering teams already paying for sourcegraph code search who want to add an ai agent that reuses the existing codebase index. free tier is generous enough for individual evaluation..
Is Aider or Amp cheaper?
Aider's pricing: Free. You bring your own API keys (Anthropic, OpenAI, DeepSeek, Gemini, etc.). 4.2× more token-efficient than Claude Code on identical tasks — verified via independent benchmarks. Amp's pricing: Free tier with usage limits. Paid tiers via Sourcegraph subscription. Bundled with Sourcegraph Code Search for teams already on the platform. The right "cheaper" pick depends on usage volume and what's included — see the pricing row in the table above.
What's Aider best for?
Cost-conscious developers, open-source purists, anyone who wants to mix Claude, GPT, DeepSeek, and Gemini in one workflow. Strong for surgical refactoring and audit-friendly git workflows.
What's Amp best for?
Engineering teams already paying for Sourcegraph Code Search who want to add an AI agent that reuses the existing codebase index. Free tier is generous enough for individual evaluation.
Are Aider and Amp direct competitors?
Yes — both are coding agent options. They target similar builders, which is why the head-to-head matters.
Compare Aider against other options