Skip to content
effecthub

AMP vs Cody

Two fact sheets from our own research, side by side — pricing, platforms, API access and status re-checked by us rather than quoted from the vendors. AMP publishes a starting price ($20); Cody does not. Only AMP has a free tier.

AMPSourcegraph's coding agent: pay-as-you-go or subscription access to an autonomous code-editing agent.CodyEnterprise coding assistant grounded in your whole repository

Side by side

FactAMPCody
CategoryAI Coding AssistantsAI Coding Assistants
Pricing modelFreemiumContact
Starts at$20 month—
Public APINoNo
PlatformsmacOS, Windows, Linux, Vscode ExtWeb, Vscode Ext
CompanySourcegraph, Inc.Sourcegraph, Inc.
Launched—2023
Last verifiedSep 1, 2026Sep 6, 2026

What our research says

AMP

The pay-as-you-go option with no markup over provider API pricing is unusual among coding agents, most wrap model costs in a flat subscription, and the free tier's autocomplete plus uncapped core agent access is generous for evaluating fit. Choosing between pay-as-you-go and the $20/$200 subscriptions takes some judgment, since heavy daily use can make either cheaper depending on actual token volume.

Pros

  • Pay-as-you-go billing passes through provider API pricing with no markup
  • Free tier includes autocomplete and core agent access with no hard token cap
  • Backed by Sourcegraph, an established code-intelligence company operating since 2013
  • Plans and executes multi-step tasks (edit, run tests, iterate) rather than single-shot prompts

Cons

  • Usage-based costs are harder to predict upfront than a flat subscription
  • No JetBrains integration confirmed, CLI and VS Code only
  • The paid Smart Mode's exact scope beyond stronger data-privacy terms was not fully detailed on the pages checked

Cody

Only worth evaluating if you already run Sourcegraph and your codebase is big enough that repository-wide retrieval actually changes answers. Solo developers and small teams cannot buy it at all any more.

Pros

  • Retrieval is backed by a real code search index rather than ad-hoc embeddings over an open folder
  • Underlying model is configurable instead of locked to one vendor
  • Enterprise controls: self-hosting, admin policy and audit

Cons

  • No free or self-serve tier since July 2025
  • Priced as part of a Sourcegraph contract, which the vendor lists as starting around $16K
  • Sourcegraph's product momentum moved to Amp, which split off as a separate company in December 2025
  • sourcegraph.com/cody now redirects to documentation instead of a product page

Which one fits

Choose AMP if you need

  • Developers who want agent coding costs tied directly to actual API usage rather than a flat markup
  • Teams already comfortable working from a CLI or VS Code rather than a dedicated IDE fork
  • Users who want to try the core agent free before committing to a subscription

Choose Cody if you need

  • Large orgs already licensed for Sourcegraph code search
  • Monorepos where cross-repo context beats file-level autocomplete
  • Security-constrained teams needing self-hosted or VPC deployment

More comparisons

All Cody alternatives →Browse all AI Coding Assistants →