Amp vs Sunk Cost (2026): Which Vibe Coding App Is Better?

Both are popular terminal coding agents. Here is how Amp and Sunk Cost stack up on price, strengths and weaknesses, and which one we would pick.

Amp

Frontier coding agent for the terminal and editor, from the makers of Sourcegraph

8.2 /10

Pricing: Free plan, paid from $20/mo

Pros

Strong results on hard, multi-step tasks
Shared threads for team review
Subagents and AGENTS.md built in

Cons

Usage-based costs add up on large tasks
Fewer configuration knobs by design

Visit Amp ↗

Sunk Cost

How long until a local LLM rig pays for itself?

6.5 /10

Pricing: Free

Pros

Free, no signup, no cookies or IP logging
Grounds the "buy hardware and run locally" debate in real numbers: hardware price, power draw and token throughput
Includes a model capability leaderboard and hardware pricing database for context

Cons

A single-purpose calculator, not an actual coding agent or MCP tool
Estimates depend on self-reported hardware/pricing data and usage assumptions

Visit Sunk Cost ↗

Amp vs Sunk Cost at a glance

	Amp	Sunk Cost
Editor score	8.2 / 10	6.5 / 10
Pricing model	Freemium	Free
Starting price	$20/mo	Free
Reader upvotes	0	0
Best for	terminal, agent	local-llm, cost-calculator, hardware
Agent Skills support	Yes	No
Subagents support	Yes	No
MCP support	Yes	No
AGENTS.md support	Yes	No
Plugins support	Yes	No
Hooks support	No	No
Rules support	No	No
Agent skills in this directory	47	0
Subagents & agents in this directory	9	3
MCP servers in this directory	72	0

Our pick

Amp edges it with a score of 8.2 versus 6.5. Amp is the better fit if you value: strong results on hard, multi-step tasks, shared threads for team review. Choose Sunk Cost instead if you need: free, no signup, no cookies or ip logging, grounds the "buy hardware and run locally" debate in real numbers: hardware price, power draw and token throughput.