Amazon Q Developer vs Sourcegraph Cody

Auto-updated comparison · last refreshed September 3, 2026

TL;DR

Amazon Q DeveloperSourcegraph Cody
Typeextensionextension
VendorAWSSourcegraph
PricingFree tier · Pro $19/month (Pro tier for higher limits + advanced features)Free tier · Pro $9/month · Enterprise $19/user
AutocompleteYesYes
Agent modeYesYes
MCP supportNoNo
Local modelsNoYes
Self-hostedNoYes
Codebase indexingYesYes
Team featuresYesYes

Where Amazon Q Developer wins

Where Sourcegraph Cody wins

Weaknesses

Amazon Q Developer: only shines on AWS workloads; less impressive outside AWS context

Sourcegraph Cody: most value if you already use Sourcegraph search; onboarding is longer than Cursor

Best for

Pick Amazon Q Developer if you are AWS-heavy devs, or cloud infrastructure work, or enterprises on AWS.

Pick Sourcegraph Cody if you are large monorepos, or enterprises already on Sourcegraph, or BYOK power users.

Try Amazon Q Developer Try Sourcegraph Cody

FAQ

Is Amazon Q Developer more expensive than Sourcegraph Cody?

Free tier · Pro $19/month (Pro tier for higher limits + advanced features) vs Free tier · Pro $9/month · Enterprise $19/user. Compare the Pro tiers first if you're a solo dev; Business/Enterprise only matters for teams.

Do Amazon Q Developer and Sourcegraph Cody use the same AI models?

Amazon Q Developer supports: claude-sonnet-4-6, internal-aws. Sourcegraph Cody supports: claude-sonnet-4-6, claude-opus-4-7, gpt-5, gemini-2.5-pro, custom-via-byok. Most modern tools default to Claude Sonnet 4.6 in 2026.

Can I use both?

Yes. They don't conflict at the file level. Some devs use one for autocomplete and one for agent work.

Related comparisons

Best Amazon Q Developer and Sourcegraph Cody pairings by language