Augment Code vs Continue
Compare Augment Code and Continue by workflow, pricing, privacy, model support, and best use cases.
Augment Code
Choose Augment Code when the main problem is applying AI to large, real-world codebases without forcing developers to abandon their current IDEs. It is less attractive as a cheap personal autocomplete tool, but strong for teams that value deep context, cloud agents, code review, automation, and enterprise controls.
Continue
Choose Continue when model control, open-source extensibility, and repository-defined AI checks matter more than a fully managed AI editor experience.
Key Differences
Workflow
Augment Code is an enterprise-focused AI coding platform for teams working in large repositories, existing IDEs, terminals, and automated engineering workflows.
Continue is an open-source AI coding agent and IDE extension ecosystem focused on configurable model access, repository-defined AI checks, and team-controlled coding workflows.
Pricing
paid
freemium
compare.fields.localModels
No
Yes
BYOK
No
Yes
compare.fields.openSource
No
Yes
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Augment Code | Continue |
|---|---|---|
| Primary workflow | Augment Code is an enterprise-focused AI coding platform for teams working in large repositories, existing IDEs, terminals, and automated engineering workflows. | Continue is an open-source AI coding agent and IDE extension ecosystem focused on configurable model access, repository-defined AI checks, and team-controlled coding workflows. |
| Type | code-assistant | extension |
| Editor base | VS Code | VS Code |
| Pricing model | paid | freemium |
| Starting price | $100 | $3 |
| Free plan | No | Yes |
| Open source | No | Yes |
| Local models | No | Yes |
| BYOK | No | Yes |
| Platforms | VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Vim, Neovim, CLI, Browser-based Cosmos cloud agent platform, GitHub, Slack, Linear | VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, CLI, GitHub |
| Models | Claude Fable 5, Claude Haiku 4.5, Claude Opus 4.5, Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro, GPT-5.1, GPT-5.2, GPT-5.4, GPT-5.5, Kimi K2.6, Prism | Anthropic, OpenAI, Azure, Amazon Bedrock, Ollama, Google Gemini, DeepSeek, Mistral, xAI, Vertex AI, Inception, HuggingFace, Groq, Together AI, DeepInfra, OpenRouter, ClawRouter, Tetrate Agent Router Service, Cohere, NVIDIA, Cloudflare, MiniMax, LM Studio, llama.cpp, LlamaStack, llamafile, SambaNova, Watson x, Sagemaker, Nebius |
| Enterprise features | SSO, OIDC, SCIM, SOC 2 Type II, Security reports, CMEK, ISO 42001 compliance, SIEM integration, Data residency options, Granular access controls, Comprehensive audit trails, Custom usage, Custom top-ups, Unlimited users, Multi-region compute, Custom size compute, Unlimited concurrent sessions, Dedicated support, Usage analytics, Advanced code review analytics, User allowlists, Multi-org GitHub support, Unlimited seats and repositories for enterprise code review | Shared private agents, Team agent controls, Gmail/GitHub SSO on Team, SAML or OIDC SSO on Company, BYOK on Company, Commitment, invoicing, and SLA on Company, GitHub PR check integration, Centralized Mission Control management |
| Best for | Enterprise engineering teams, Large monorepos, Production refactors, Repository-scale debugging, Teams that want AI agents inside existing IDEs, Teams using JetBrains who do not want to switch to a VS Code fork, Cloud agent automation, AI-assisted code review, Migration and modernization projects, Incident investigation and security remediation workflows | Developers who want AI coding assistance inside VS Code without switching to a full AI-native editor., Teams that want AI review rules stored in the repository and enforced as PR status checks., Organizations that need model flexibility across cloud, local, self-hosted, and gateway providers., Developers building custom coding agents with YAML configuration, rules, prompts, models, and tools., Engineering teams experimenting with AI quality gates before adopting larger autonomous coding systems. |
| Not best for | Solo developers looking for the cheapest autocomplete tool, Users who want a full standalone AI IDE replacement, Teams requiring fully local model execution, Workflows that need BYOK model routing as a core documented feature, Projects where usage-based AI billing is unacceptable, Users whose main need is simple line-by-line code completion on a low-cost plan | Users who want a polished all-in-one AI IDE with minimal configuration., Teams that prefer a single vendor-managed model and billing experience., JetBrains-heavy teams that need the IDE plugin to be the primary supported path., Users who do not want token-based billing for hosted model usage., Organizations that are uncomfortable with the current read-only status of the legacy main GitHub repository. |
Use Case Winners
Both Augment Code and Continue have comparable signals here.
Continue supports local model workflows.
Augment Code lists more team or enterprise controls.
Both Augment Code and Continue have comparable signals here.
Continue supports more model/provider options or BYOK-style workflows.
Continue is marked as open source.
Pricing Comparison
Augment Code
- Business$100 / month
Flat monthly plan for up to 50 seats with $100/month of usage included across LLM, Context Engine, and Cosmos compute.
- EnterpriseCustom
Custom usage, unlimited users, advanced security, SSO/OIDC/SCIM, compliance options, multi-region compute, and dedicated support.
Continue
- Open-source Extension / CLI$0
Apache-2.0 codebase with VS Code extension, CLI, and JetBrains plugin artifacts available from official channels.
- Starter$3 / million tokens
Pay-as-you-go usage for creating and running agents, integrations, and frontier model credits.
- Team$20 / seat/month
Team management, private shared agents, agent controls, Gmail/GitHub SSO, and $10 credits per seat.
- CompanyCustom
Enterprise plan with SAML or OIDC SSO, BYOK, commitments, invoicing, and SLA.
Privacy & Security
Augment Code
Augment states that paid plans do not allow AI training on customer data. The platform processes codebase context, prompts, model requests, repository metadata, tool calls, and cloud-agent session data to provide its Context Engine, IDE clients, CLI, Cosmos, and automation features. Enterprise buyers should review the Trust Center, data residency, CMEK, audit trail, SIEM, and access-control options before using it with regulated or highly confidential code.
Continue
Continue documents anonymous telemetry in the open-source extensions, says it strips personally identifiable information, and provides opt-out controls for IDE extensions and the CLI. Local and offline setups are documented, but privacy also depends on the chosen model provider, GitHub integration, telemetry settings, and any configured data destinations.
Choose Augment Code if...
- Enterprise engineering teams
- Large monorepos
- Production refactors
- Repository-scale debugging
- Teams that want AI agents inside existing IDEs
Choose Continue if...
- Developers who want AI coding assistance inside VS Code without switching to a full AI-native editor.
- Teams that want AI review rules stored in the repository and enforced as PR status checks.
- Organizations that need model flexibility across cloud, local, self-hosted, and gateway providers.
- Developers building custom coding agents with YAML configuration, rules, prompts, models, and tools.
- Engineering teams experimenting with AI quality gates before adopting larger autonomous coding systems.
Avoid Augment Code if...
- Solo developers looking for the cheapest autocomplete tool
- Users who want a full standalone AI IDE replacement
- Teams requiring fully local model execution
- Workflows that need BYOK model routing as a core documented feature
- Projects where usage-based AI billing is unacceptable
Avoid Continue if...
- Users who want a polished all-in-one AI IDE with minimal configuration.
- Teams that prefer a single vendor-managed model and billing experience.
- JetBrains-heavy teams that need the IDE plugin to be the primary supported path.
- Users who do not want token-based billing for hosted model usage.
- Organizations that are uncomfortable with the current read-only status of the legacy main GitHub repository.