OpenCode vs Claude Code: Which Should You Use

If you already pay for a Claude subscription, keeping Claude Code is the sensible default; switch to OpenCode only when you need a model or provider that Anthropic will not give you.

Both tools change fast, so the specifics date quickly. This piece stays on the one difference that does not, and keeps the fast-moving numbers together near the end. For the record: OpenReplay sells session replay and has nothing riding on either tool. If you want a feature-by-feature look instead, our earlier OpenAI Codex vs. Claude Code comparison covers that.

The One Difference in OpenCode vs Claude Code That Matters

OpenCode is an MIT-licensed open-source coding agent that runs against whichever model provider you configure; Claude Code is Anthropic’s own agent and runs only Claude models. Every other difference between them, what they cost, how they behave in the terminal, how you extend them, follows from that one structural fact, and it is the only part of this comparison that will still be true in six months.

Everything else expires. Model lineups, plan prices, default models, and feature flags on both sides change monthly, so they are all collected in one section near the end. For OpenCode’s basics (install, Plan and Build modes, provider setup), see our OpenCode primer; none of that needs repeating here.

What Does the Split Mean for Cost?

The cost question is not which tool has the lower list price; it is whether you are paying for a subscription that bundles the model or holding provider keys you can point anywhere. With Claude Code, model access comes inside an Anthropic subscription, so your terminal usage draws from the same pool as everything else on the plan and your monthly bill is flat until you hit the limits. With OpenCode, the tool itself is free and your cost is whatever the provider behind it charges: per-token API billing through your own keys, or one of OpenCode’s optional paid offerings, a pay-as-you-go gateway and a flat monthly tier for open-weight models.

The two shapes suit different usage curves. A bundled subscription rewards heavy, steady use of one vendor’s models. Bring-your-own-key rewards routing: an expensive model for hard problems, a cheap one for chores. And running a local model through OpenCode eliminates per-token cost entirely, but it is not free; you are trading an API bill for hardware, electricity, and usually a smaller model.

What Does the Split Mean Day to Day in the Terminal?

Day to day, the two tools are more alike than any comparison admits: both give you a TUI, both ask for approval before file writes and shell commands, both read a memory file from the repo, and both compact the session when the context window fills. The working loop, prompt, review diff, approve, is the same muscle memory in either.

The asymmetry sits in the memory files, and it has a practical consequence. Claude Code reads CLAUDE.md; if your repo standardized on AGENTS.md instead, Anthropic documents a one-line bridge, a CLAUDE.md containing @AGENTS.md, to import it. OpenCode natively reads AGENTS.md but falls back to an existing CLAUDE.md when no AGENTS.md is present, along with ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md and ~/.claude/skills/.

That fallback means the cheapest way to settle the question is to run the experiment yourself:

curl -fsSL https://opencode.ai/install | bash
cd your-project    # one that already has a CLAUDE.md
opencode

Give it one real task from your backlog. OpenCode picks up the project context Claude Code already uses, so the trial costs an install and a few minutes, not a migration.

What Does the Split Mean for Extensibility?

Your integrations are not what you are choosing between. Both tools speak the Model Context Protocol, both take markdown-defined skills, and both delegate to subagents with their own context and permissions, so the MCP servers, skills, and agent definitions you have already built move with you in either direction.

What differs is packaging. Claude Code distributes extensions through first-party plugins and marketplaces: manifest-based bundles that can carry subagents, hooks, skills, and MCP server configs, and that install from inside the tool. OpenCode’s plugins are JavaScript or TypeScript modules loaded from a local directory or npm, with hooks into lifecycle events such as tool execution and session compaction. One is a storefront; the other is a module system. If you want to install extensibility, Claude Code’s model is more polished; if you want to program the harness itself, OpenCode exposes more of it.

Where Things Stand: Models, Pricing, and Surfaces

Everything in this section is perishable; check the linked vendor pages before acting on any of it.

Two caveats worth pinning down. OpenCode’s providers page states that Anthropic prohibits using Claude Pro/Max subscriptions in third-party tools and that OpenCode stopped bundling the relevant plugins in v1.3.0, so Claude models in OpenCode mean API rates. And OpenCode’s in-progress V2 documentation drops the CLAUDE.md fallback in favor of AGENTS.md only, which would raise the trial cost described above from zero to one file.

Which Should You Use: OpenCode or Claude Code?

If you already pay for a Claude subscription and want one tool that works across terminal, editor, and desktop, stay on Claude Code. You have prepaid for frontier models, the tool meets you on every surface you work in, and nothing about OpenCode’s flexibility is worth paying twice for model access you already hold.

Switch to OpenCode when you need something Claude Code structurally cannot give you: a local or open-weight model for privacy or compliance, a cheaper model for routine work, or a pinned model-and-provider combination that will not change underneath you between releases. Those are provider needs, and provider choice is the one axis on which Claude Code will never compete.

The structural fact decides it: Claude Code is the better product for Claude models, and OpenCode is the only one of the two that can run anything else. Match the tool to your provider situation, and since your MCP servers and skills travel either way, the decision is cheap to revisit. Run the three-command trial above on a real task this week and you will know which side of it you are on.

FAQs

Which paid AI subscriptions work with OpenCode?

OpenCode's providers documentation lists ChatGPT Plus, GitHub Copilot, and GitLab Duo as subscriptions you can sign in with directly, with no extra configuration. Claude Pro and Max subscriptions do not: OpenCode's docs state that Anthropic prohibits subscription use in third-party tools and that OpenCode stopped bundling the relevant plugins in v1.3.0. Running Claude models in OpenCode therefore requires an Anthropic API key billed per token.

Can I use OpenCode and Claude Code in the same repository?

Yes, nothing conflicts between them. In OpenCode's current v1.x line, it reads a project's CLAUDE.md when no AGENTS.md exists, so both tools share the same project instructions. If you maintain a native AGENTS.md, keep a CLAUDE.md containing the single line @AGENTS.md so Claude Code imports it. If that fallback gets in your way, set OPENCODE_DISABLE_CLAUDE_CODE=1 and OpenCode ignores the .claude files entirely.

Do I need a Claude subscription to use Claude Code?

No. Claude Code also runs on pay-as-you-go Anthropic API billing, where usage is charged per token instead of drawing from a subscription pool; on API accounts it defaults to Opus 5. It is included in every paid Claude plan starting with Pro at $20/mo, which is what makes the bill flat. The standalone desktop app is the exception and requires a paid subscription.