These two tools used to be easy to tell apart: Copilot finished your lines, Claude Code ran whole tasks. Now Copilot has an agent mode and a command-line tool, and Claude Code has editor integrations. The difference that remains is mostly where each one starts.
The short version
| Claude Code | GitHub Copilot | |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | An agent you talk to in your terminal | An assistant built into editors such as VS Code and JetBrains |
| Where you work | Terminal first, plus IDE and desktop integrations | Inside your editor, plus a CLI, GitHub itself and a cloud coding agent |
| Free plan | No. Needs a paid Claude plan or API credits | Yes, with a monthly cap (2,000 completions, limited chat and agent use) |
| MCP servers | Yes | Yes |
| Project instructions | CLAUDE.md, plus skills | Custom instruction files for Copilot |
| Strongest at | Multi-file work across a whole project | Fitting into an existing editor and GitHub workflow |
Plans and prices change, so check Claude's pricing and GitHub's plans page rather than trusting any table, including this one.
How they feel to use
GitHub Copilot sits in your editor. You might get suggestions as you type, ask questions in a chat panel, or switch to agent mode, where Copilot picks the files to change and proposes edits and terminal commands to finish a task. GitHub's docs say agent mode is available in VS Code, Visual Studio, JetBrains IDEs, Xcode and Eclipse. If you already work in one of those, adding Copilot changes very little about your day.
Claude Code is a conversation in your terminal. You open it inside your project folder, describe what you want, and it reads files, proposes edits and asks permission before it runs commands. There's no new editor to learn, but the terminal itself takes getting used to. See our install guide for the first steps.
Where Claude Code is stronger
- Whole-project tasks. It's designed around exploring a project, planning and making coordinated changes.
- Customisation through plain files. Skills, hooks, subagents, CLAUDE.md and MCP servers are all configured with files you can read and commit.
- Editor independence. It works alongside whatever editor you like.
Where GitHub Copilot is stronger
- Meeting you where you are. It works inside editors many developers already use, so there's little to set up.
- A free plan. Useful for trying it, or for light use.
- GitHub integration. Copilot connects to GitHub issues and pull requests, and has a cloud coding agent that works on the GitHub side.
- Choice of models. GitHub's docs list models from several providers, including Claude models, so you can pick within Copilot. Which models are available varies by plan and editor.
What they share
Both support MCP, the standard way to plug extra tools into an AI, so servers such as GitHub or a browser tool can work with either. Both ask before taking risky actions, and both are only as good as the instructions and checks you give them. Whichever you use, keep a Git safety net in place.
Who should pick what
- You're comfortable in VS Code or JetBrains and want the smallest change to your routine: GitHub Copilot.
- You want to try AI coding without paying: GitHub Copilot's free plan is the easy start.
- You live in the terminal, or want to script and customise your agent: Claude Code.
- You tackle big, multi-file changes often: Try Claude Code on one of those tasks and compare.
- You manage a team: Run both on one real task and see which people keep using.
Using both is common and nothing conflicts. Copilot can handle day-to-day editing in the IDE while Claude Code takes the larger jobs.
Our verdict
There's no single winner. If you want AI inside your existing editor, with a free plan and GitHub built in, start with Copilot. If you want a more hands-on agent you can shape with your own files and don't mind the terminal, start with Claude Code. For another angle, see Claude Code vs Cursor.