Agentic harness comparison
Amp vs Claude Code
Amp is a Sourcegraph-lineage terminal agent with orbs/subscription billing; Claude Code is Anthropic’s CLI on the Claude Pro/Max pool. First-week choice is install path and billing shape more than raw model branding.
Details last verified August 14, 2026.
Amp
Amp
Terminal + IDE integrations · Agentic
Anthropic
Claude Code
Terminal · Agentic
| Specification | Amp | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Amp | Anthropic |
| Runs in | Terminal + IDE integrations | Terminal |
| Editor support | Any (CLI), VS Code / Cursor / Windsurf, Neovim, Zed | Any (editor-agnostic) |
| Autonomy | Agentic | Agentic |
| Pricing model | Hybrid | Hybrid |
| Requires changing editor | No | No |
Benchmark scores carry the month they were measured. Values we could not confirm are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.
Amp
Agent CLI with web remote control, IDE integrations, Attach Anything context, and subscription/Orbs usage — editor-agnostic for teams that want a strong terminal agent with optional IDE glue.
Best for
- Terminal-first agent work with IDE hooks
- Teams evaluating Amp workflows alongside other terminal agents
- Remote-controlled agent sessions via the web
Watch out
Prefer the official Amp install script over unrelated npm packages named amp. Subscriptions are Megawatt $20 and Gigawatt $200. Orbs a1 sizes bill about $0.08–$1.32/hr, auto-pause after 5 minutes idle, and can be set per thread with `--orb-size`. Attach Anything, subscription Orbs, and linked ChatGPT usage are separate from the free sign-in path — confirm live Amp billing before a team pilot. A linked ChatGPT subscription bills Dial low/medium/high to that sub (Terra/Sol); ultra still uses Fable on Amp credits.
Claude Code
Runs in the terminal rather than an IDE, so it sits alongside whatever editor the team already uses. Primary consumer access is via Claude Pro/Max/Team/Enterprise; Console/API is the alternate path.
Best for
- Multi-file refactors
- Migrations
- Delegated engineering tasks
Watch out
From 2026-08-14, new Pro/Max/Team sessions default to Auto (classifier-gated; classifier overhead free on those plans — Enterprise/API still opt-in). +50% weekly usage boost ends 2026-08-19 23:59 PT — don't size Pro/Max recommendations on temporary headroom. Included usage still shares allowance with Claude chat; an ANTHROPIC_API_KEY can bill API credits instead. Free Claude.ai does not include Claude Code. BAA + Claude Code requires ZDR, which blocks Covered Models (e.g. Fable 5) — plan HIPAA stacks accordingly.
Common questions
Amp vs Claude Code
Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.
Do I have to change editor to use Amp or Claude Code?
Neither does. Amp runs in the terminal + ide integrations alongside any editor and Claude Code runs in the terminal alongside any editor, so people keep the setup they already have.
How are Amp and Claude Code priced?
Both are hybrid. The headline seat or plan price is not the heavy-agent bill — included credits, shared pools, and overages dominate once you loop agents hard. Estimate cost per successful task and set spend caps.
Is Amp or Claude Code better for large refactors?
Both are agentic, so neither has a structural advantage on delegated work. Judge them on editor fit and price instead.
Will my project rules transfer between Amp and Claude Code?
Usually not automatically. Cursor rules, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, and extension-specific configs are different conventions. Keep one source of truth in the repository (commonly AGENTS.md) and copy or link into each tool’s native format so switching does not wipe months of project teaching.
Does Claude Code require a Max plan?
No. Claude Pro includes Claude Code with a shared usage pool alongside Claude chat. Max raises limits; Free Claude.ai chat does not include Claude Code. An ANTHROPIC_API_KEY can bill Console/API instead of the subscription pool.
Do coding agents replace code review?
No. Agents can draft patches faster, but they do not remove the need for human review of plans, tool calls, permissions, diffs, tests, and rollback paths. Treat autonomy as a reason for stronger review, not less — see the coding assistant rollout guide at /ai-harnesses/guides/coding-assistant-rollout-guide.
Should we harden MCP before rolling out a coding agent?
Yes for any agent that can install MCP servers or run tools. Maintain a short allowlist, review each server’s folder and network access before install, fail closed on unknown tools, and log tool calls. .cursorignore and similar rules do not block MCP or shell access once a command is approved.
Is Amp free once the CLI is installed?
No. The installer is free, but agent usage can draw from a subscription, workspace credits, linked ChatGPT usage, or remote Orbs. Thread visibility (Private vs Workspace vs Unlisted) is separate from billing — confirm the active workspace and executor before a long run.
Next step
Which one fits
Autonomy and editor constraints decide this far more reliably than a benchmark score.
If most of your week is small, frequent edits, an assistive workflow beats delegation and an agentic harness sits idle while billing. If you regularly hand over work spanning many files, the reverse is true.
Where one tool requires changing editor and the other does not, that difference usually outweighs any capability gap across a team — rollouts fail on adoption, not capability.
“Open vendor” links use a first-party redirect for click counting. They are not commissionable partner placements unless a programme is active for that vendor. Affiliate disclosure.