OpenCode vs Claude Code is the comparison most developers end up making once they decide they want an AI agent in the terminal instead of an AI editor. Claude Code is Anthropic’s own agent, built around Claude models and paid for through a Claude plan. OpenCode is the open source alternative that runs almost any model you point it at, including a handful of free ones. We installed both on a Windows 11 machine, handed them the same two coding tasks, and graded the output with our own hidden tests. The results are below, followed by pricing, setup, and a plain recommendation for who should use which.
If you are also weighing AI editors, our Claude Code vs Cursor and Cursor vs Windsurf comparisons cover that side. This guide sticks to the two terminal agents.
The short answer
Pick Claude Code if you already pay for a Claude plan and want the quickest path from prompt to working code. On our harder task it finished in half the time and wrote the leanest solution. Pick OpenCode if you want to choose your own model, keep costs close to zero, or avoid tying your workflow to one vendor. Its free models passed every check we threw at them. They just took longer to get there.
OpenCode vs Claude Code at a glance
| OpenCode | Claude Code | |
|---|---|---|
| License | Open source (MIT) | Proprietary, built by Anthropic |
| Models | 75+ providers per its docs, plus local models through Ollama, LM Studio and llama.cpp | Claude models only (also available through Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud and Microsoft Foundry) |
| Cheapest way in | Built-in free models, no account needed (offered for a limited time) | Claude Pro at $20 a month, or $17 a month billed annually |
| Where it runs | Terminal, desktop app, IDE extension, web | Terminal, VS Code, JetBrains, desktop app, web, mobile |
| MCP servers | Yes, local and remote | Yes, local and remote |
| Project rules file | AGENTS.md (falls back to CLAUDE.md) | CLAUDE.md (can read AGENTS.md) |
| Version we tested | 2.2.4 | 2.1.314 |
| Install size (npm, our machine) | 495 MB | 288 MB |
| Startup time (median of 5) | 145 ms | 52 ms |
The last two rows are our own measurements. We timed --version five times for each tool and took the median, which mostly reflects how fast each binary loads. Neither number will matter much day to day, though OpenCode’s install is noticeably heavier because the package ships a 248 MB executable.
How we tested
We installed both tools with npm on October 30, 2026, on a Windows 11 PC running Node 24. We ran them natively on Windows rather than in WSL. OpenCode’s documentation recommends WSL on Windows, so treat its timings here as a slightly conservative read.
The test project was a small Python command line tool for managing a stock list, with tests written in the standard library’s unittest. Each agent got a fresh copy of the project and the exact same prompt, and ran unattended with permissions auto-approved. When each one finished, we ran a separate grading script the agents never saw, which checked the real behavior of the code instead of trusting the agent’s own summary.
The three contestants:
- Claude Code 2.1.314 on its default model for our account, Claude Opus 5.5, signed in with a Claude subscription.
- OpenCode 2.2.4 with DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Free, one of the free models that shows up after install.
- OpenCode 2.2.4 with Big Pickle, another free model.
A note on fairness
We tested each tool the way most people will actually run it. Claude Code only runs Claude models, and Anthropic does not allow Claude subscriptions inside third party tools, so OpenCode could not use the same model without paying API rates. One run per task per agent is also a small sample. Read these as field notes from real use, and expect your own results to vary with the model and the codebase.
Task 1: fix three bugs and add a JSON flag
The project started with four failing tests caused by three planted bugs: an off by one error in pagination, a stock total that dropped the cents, and a low stock check that used “less than” where the spec said “at or below.” The prompt asked each agent to fix the bugs without touching the existing tests, add a --json flag to two commands, write tests for it, and run the suite.
| Agent and model | Time | Hidden checks | Tests in suite | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OpenCode + Big Pickle | 31.5 s | All passed | 8 | $0 (free model) |
| OpenCode + DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | 40.0 s | All passed | 8 | $0 (free model) |
| Claude Code + Opus 5.5 | 43.2 s | All passed | 10 | $0.33 at API rates |
All three found every bug, and none of them touched the original tests. Claude Code wrote a couple of extra tests, and OpenCode on Big Pickle finished first. On a job this small there was no real winner. If most of your day is small fixes like this, a free model in OpenCode will do the work.
Task 2: a feature with a strict spec
The second task was closer to a real ticket. The tool had to load both CSV and JSON Lines files, skip broken rows with a warning in an exact format and an exact row count, sort on several fields with a minus sign for descending order, sort before paginating, and exit with status code 2 on an unknown sort field, all without breaking anything that already worked. Our grader ran 13 checks, including the awkward edge cases: blank lines that must not count as rows, ties broken by the second sort key, and sorting that has to happen before the page is cut.
| Agent and model | Time | Hidden checks | Lines added (code and tests) | Tests in suite | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code + Opus 5.5 | 2 min 7 s | 13 of 13 | 197 | 26 | $0.71 at API rates |
| OpenCode + DeepSeek V4.1 Flash | 4 min 14 s | 13 of 13 | 505 | 34 | $0 (free model) |
| OpenCode + Big Pickle | 4 min 27 s | 13 of 13 | 373 | 22 | $0 (free model) |
We expected the free models to trip on at least one edge case. None did. Every agent passed all 13 hidden checks and left the original tests intact, adding new tests rather than rewriting old ones.
The gap showed up in speed and in how much code each agent produced. Claude Code finished in about half the time and solved the same problem with fewer than half the lines of the DeepSeek run. DeepSeek wrote the most tests, which is useful, but it also means more code to review before you merge. All three wrote careful, defensive parsing code. Claude Code’s was simply the most compact.
The cost column needs context. Claude Code ran on a subscription, so we were not billed per token. The dollar figure is what the same work would cost at Anthropic’s API rates, and on a subscription it counts against your plan’s usage limits instead.
Where OpenCode wins
You choose the model
This is the main reason people switch. OpenCode’s docs list more than 75 providers, including Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Amazon Bedrock, GitHub Copilot, OpenRouter and DeepSeek, and you can change models from one session to the next. It also runs local models through Ollama, LM Studio and llama.cpp, so code never has to leave your machine. Our guides to Ollama and Ollama vs LM Studio cover that setup.
It can cost nothing
Right after install, with no account and no API key, OpenCode listed eight free models on our machine. OpenCode says the free models are available for a limited time, so the lineup will change, but as of this writing you can do real work without paying anything. When you outgrow them, OpenCode Go costs $10 a month for access to a set of open coding models, with Go Plus at $40 a month for higher limits.
It is open source
OpenCode is MIT licensed and had more than 223,000 GitHub stars when we checked on October 30, 2026. You can read the code, fork it, and see exactly what the agent sends to the model. For teams with strict review policies, that transparency counts for a lot.
One background service for every interface
OpenCode 2 runs a background service that the terminal, desktop app and web interface all attach to, so a session started in one place is available in the others. It also includes an acp command that starts an Agent Client Protocol server, which lets editors that support ACP drive OpenCode directly.
Where Claude Code wins
It got the hard task done faster, with less code
In our tests the difference only showed up once the task got harder, and that is the kind of work where it matters most. Half the time and less than half the code is a real saving across a week of tickets, and smaller diffs are quicker to review.
It runs in more places
Claude Code works in the terminal, VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, a desktop app, the browser and the Claude mobile app, and sessions can move between them. You can start a task on the web, pull it into your terminal, or hand a terminal session to the desktop app to review diffs visually. Cloud scheduled tasks keep running when your laptop is closed.
The ecosystem is deeper
Beyond the basics, Claude Code has skills for packaging repeatable workflows, hooks that run shell commands before or after its actions, subagents that work on parts of a task in parallel, and auto memory that saves what it learns between sessions. It also plugs into GitHub Actions, GitLab CI/CD, automatic pull request review and Slack. OpenCode has plugins and agents of its own, but Claude Code’s integrations reach further into a team’s existing tools.
Anthropic builds the model and the tool
Because one company makes both, Claude Code is designed around how Claude models work, and your plan’s usage covers the tool and the model in one bill. There is no API key to manage and no gateway in the middle.
OpenCode vs Claude Code pricing
| Plan | Price | What you get |
|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | ||
| Claude Free | $0 | Does not include Claude Code |
| Claude Pro | $20/month, or $17/month billed annually | Claude Code included, baseline usage |
| Claude Max | $100/month | 5x Pro usage |
| Claude Ultra | $200/month | 10x Pro weekly usage |
| Anthropic API | Per token | Pay only for what you use |
| OpenCode | ||
| The software | Free | Bring your own API keys or local models |
| Free models | $0 | A rotating set, offered for a limited time |
| OpenCode Go | $10/month | Monthly usage limits across a set of open coding models |
| OpenCode Go Plus | $40/month | Higher limits |
| OpenCode Go Teams | $20/member/month | Separate limits for each member |
| Pay as you go | Per token, plus a 4.6% + $0.31 fee on each credit purchase | Access to a wider catalog, including Claude, GPT and Gemini models |
Your Claude subscription will not work in OpenCode
Anthropic’s terms reserve Claude subscription sign-in for Claude Code and Anthropic’s own apps, and OpenCode’s documentation states that Anthropic prohibits using Claude Pro or Max subscriptions through third party plugins. To run Claude models inside OpenCode, you need an Anthropic API key and pay per token. On OpenCode’s own gateway, Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 per million input tokens and $20 per million output tokens.
For a solo developer who codes most days, Claude Pro is the simplest predictable bill. If you want to spend nothing at all, or you want one subscription that covers several open models, OpenCode is cheaper. The math changes if you want Claude models specifically: paying API rates through OpenCode for heavy daily use will usually cost more than a Claude plan.
How to install each one
Claude Code
Anthropic recommends its native installer, which updates itself in the background.
# macOS, Linux and WSL
curl -fsSL https://claude.ai/install.sh | bash
# Windows PowerShell
irm https://claude.ai/install.ps1 | iex
# Homebrew
brew install --cask claude-codeRun claude inside a project folder and it asks you to sign in on first use. On native Windows, Anthropic recommends installing Git for Windows so Claude Code can use a Bash shell. Without it, Claude Code falls back to PowerShell.
OpenCode
Pay attention to the package name. On npm, opencode-ai still installs OpenCode 1 (version 1.19.5 when we checked), while @opencode/cli installs OpenCode 2. Both use the same opencode command, so remove the old one first if you are upgrading.
# OpenCode 2 with npm
npm i -g @opencode/cli@latest
# Install script (macOS and Linux)
curl -fsSL https://opencode.ai/v2/install | bash
# Homebrew
brew install anomalyco/tap/opencode-v2The npm install took 11.4 seconds on our machine. Run opencode models afterward to see which models are available, free ones included. To add a paid provider, use /connect inside the app or the opencode auth command.
Can you use both?
Yes, and plenty of developers do. The easiest way to keep them in sync is a single AGENTS.md file in your project root. OpenCode reads it first, and Claude Code can read it in place of a CLAUDE.md. OpenCode also falls back to an existing CLAUDE.md if you have one, so a project set up for Claude Code mostly works in OpenCode without changes.
MCP servers are configured separately in each tool. OpenCode uses an mcp section in its opencode.json config, while Claude Code has its own settings. Our list of the best MCP servers works with both, and our MCP explainer covers how they fit together.
A common split is to use Claude Code for the hard feature work, where it was clearly faster in our testing, and OpenCode with a free or cheap model for quick fixes, scripts and experiments.
Which should you pick?
- You already pay for Claude Pro or higher: start with Claude Code. Your plan already includes it, and you cannot use that plan inside OpenCode.
- You want to spend nothing: OpenCode with its free models. They handled both of our tasks.
- Your code cannot leave your machine: OpenCode with a local model through Ollama or LM Studio.
- You like trying new models as they come out: OpenCode, which can switch providers from one session to the next.
- Your team needs enterprise controls: Claude Code, which offers configurations for HIPAA-regulated work and zero data retention on qualifying plans.
- You work across a terminal, an IDE and your phone: Claude Code, which moves sessions between surfaces.
For a broader look at the field, including editor-based tools, see our guide to the best AI coding assistants.
Frequently asked questions
Is OpenCode better than Claude Code?
It depends on what you value. In our OpenCode vs Claude Code testing, both solved every task correctly. Claude Code was about twice as fast on the harder task and wrote less code, while OpenCode did the same work for free. If speed and polish matter most, Claude Code comes out ahead. If cost and model choice matter most, OpenCode does.
Is OpenCode free?
The software is free and open source under the MIT license. You pay for the model you use, unless you pick one of the free models OpenCode offers for a limited time, or run a local model on your own hardware.
Can I use my Claude Pro or Max subscription with OpenCode?
No. Anthropic’s terms reserve subscription sign-in for Claude Code and its own apps, and OpenCode’s docs say Anthropic prohibits it. You can still use Claude models in OpenCode with an Anthropic API key, paying per token.
Does OpenCode support MCP servers?
Yes. OpenCode supports both local and remote MCP servers, configured under the mcp key in its config file. Some older comparisons say otherwise, but the official docs are clear on this.
Is OpenCode a good Claude Code alternative?
It is the strongest open source Claude Code alternative we have tested. The workflow is similar, with a plan mode for read-only analysis and a build mode for making changes, and it reads the same project rules files. The main trade-off is that the best results with Claude models cost more through the API than through a Claude plan.
Is Claude Code vs OpenCode a fair fight if they use different models?
Not a perfectly controlled one, and we would rather say so up front. Claude Code only runs Claude models, and a Claude subscription cannot be used inside OpenCode, so the comparison most people actually face is Claude Code on a Claude plan against OpenCode on a free or cheap model. That is the setup we tested.
Does Claude Code work on Windows?
Yes. It installs natively from PowerShell, through WinGet, or inside WSL. Installing Git for Windows is recommended so it can use a Bash shell.
The verdict
For most developers, the OpenCode vs Claude Code question comes down to how you pay for models. If you have a Claude plan, Claude Code is the better tool, and in our testing it was clearly faster on serious work. If you would rather not pay at all, or you want the freedom to swap models and run them locally, OpenCode is excellent, and its free models were more capable than we expected. Both installed in minutes and both handled real tasks well, so the cheapest way to decide is to run your own next ticket through each one.
Ben has spent years helping teams choose and roll out the right software, and started The Software Scout to share what he’s learned. He focuses on real-world usability, honest pricing breakdowns, and the details vendors gloss over, covering productivity, project management, marketing, and finance tools. His goal is simple: help you buy the right software the first time.