Amp: what developers actually say
We read every Hacker News comment from Nov 2025 – Nov 2026 that gave a real opinion on Amp. 22 of the 25 opinions come from people who say they use it themselves.
Developers give Amp a 90% approval score across 25 opinions from 24 authors, and 22 of those authors speak from firsthand use. They praise the UI, quick setup, visible costs, speed, and first-attempt accuracy, and five opinions prefer it to Claude Code while two prefer it to OpenAI Codex. Cost is the main complaint: one user stopped because it was too expensive, and another said it burns through money quickly. Monthly approval stayed between 90% and 100% from January through September 2026, but the last four months have only one or two opinions each, so the recent trend rests on a thin sample.
Pick it if
- Want a polished terminal UI and quick setup
- Like visible costs and automatic model selection
- Will review generated code closely and want speed
Look elsewhere if
- Need low, predictable spending
- Expect clean code without close review
- Rely on handoff, which Amp removed
Strengths and weaknesses
Each row counts opinions that mentioned the topic. Bars to the right of the line are praise, bars to the left are complaints.
How opinion has moved
What developers say
Praise
Complaints
Summaries are paraphrased. Each links to the original comment.
Amp compared
Best Amp alternatives, according to developers who switched →
FAQ
Is Amp worth it?
Most opinions are positive: approval is 90% across 25 opinions. Users like the UI, setup, and first-attempt accuracy. Cost is the main reason people leave.
Is Amp better than Claude Code?
In this sample, five opinions preferred Amp to Claude Code and two preferred it to OpenAI Codex. One person preferred OpenCode instead. The data does not include a count of people who chose Claude Code over Amp.
Why do developers stop using Amp?
Cost is the main reason. Users describe it as too expensive for useful work and say it burns through money quickly. Some also report bad code and regressions without close supervision.