Claude Code vs. Devin Fusion CLI

Comparison between Claude Code and Devin Fusion CLI across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, including benchmark scores, cost, execution time, and token usage.

For details relating to our methodology, see our methodology page.

Explore other comparisons
vs

Highlights

Updated
Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v1.5 · Higher is better
Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better
Average API cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

Comparison

Side-by-side comparison of Claude Code and Devin Fusion CLI.

Coding Agent Comparison

Metric
Claude Code
Sonnet 5.5 (max)
Devin Fusion CLI
Claude Fable 5.1 XHigh + SWE-2 Medium
Analysis
Agent Harness
Claude Code
Devin Fusion CLI
Representative Model
Sonnet 5.5 (max)
Claude Fable 5.1 XHigh + SWE-2 Medium
Coding Agent Index
68
62
Claude Code has a higher Coding Agent Index than Devin Fusion CLI
DeepSWE v1.1
72%
63%
Claude Code has a higher DeepSWE v1.1 score than Devin Fusion CLI
Terminal-Bench 4.0
66%
56%
Claude Code has a higher Terminal-Bench 4.0 score than Devin Fusion CLI
SWE-Atlas-QnA
67%
66%
Claude Code has a higher SWE-Atlas-QnA score than Devin Fusion CLI
Cost per Task
$14.19
$7.90
Devin Fusion CLI has a lower cost per task than Claude Code
Time per Task
1.5h
35.8m
Devin Fusion CLI has a lower time per task than Claude Code
Turns per Task
265.9
99.5
Devin Fusion CLI has a lower turns per task than Claude Code
Token Usage per Task
27.7M
9.7M
Devin Fusion CLI has a lower token usage per task than Claude Code
Cache Hit Rate
95%
96%
Devin Fusion CLI has a higher cache hit rate than Claude Code

Model Variants

Evaluated model variants for Claude Code and Devin Fusion CLI.

Model Variants

Claude Code
Sonnet 5.5 (max)
68
72%
66%
67%
$14.19
1.5h
27.7M
Claude Code
Opus 5.5 (max)
66
68%
63%
66%
$13.04
1.1h
15.6M
Claude Code
Sonnet 5.5 (xhigh)
63
68%
58%
62%
$3.33
27.0m
7.1M
Claude Code
Fable 5.1 (max) (with fallback)
62
64%
58%
65%
$12.39
34.8m
5.7M
Claude Code
Opus 5 (max)
60
63%
55%
62%
$10.79
41.9m
11.4M
Claude Code
Sonnet 5.5 (high)
55
67%
42%
56%
$1.24
12.3m
2.7M
Claude Code
Sonnet 5.5 (medium)
46
65%
27%
45%
$0.62
8.5m
1.3M
Claude Code
Qwen3.8 Max
43
51%
17%
62%
$3.48
1.1h
8.7M
Claude Code
Sonnet 5.5 (low)
42
62%
25%
39%
$0.48
6.3m
977.3K
Devin Fusion CLI
Claude Fable 5.1 XHigh + SWE-2 Medium
62
63%
56%
66%
$7.90
35.8m
9.7M
Devin Fusion CLI
GPT-6 Astra XHigh + SWE-2 Medium
59
67%
50%
59%
$4.54
24.7m
6.1M

Performance

Performance across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v1.5 incorporates 3 benchmarks: DeepSWE v1.1, Terminal-Bench 4.0, and SWE-Atlas-QnA · Higher is better

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Cost per Task

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average pay-per-token API cost per task (USD)
Most attractive quadrant
Pareto line

Token Usage

Token consumption across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.

Token Usage per Task

Average input, cache, and output tokens per task
Prompt cache hit rates can vary significantly by provider routing, which can materially change effective cost.

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Total Tokens

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average total tokens per task
Most attractive quadrant

Cost

Pay-per-token API cost across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, based on current per-token pricing.

Cost per Task

Average pay-per-token API cost per task (USD) · Lower is better

Execution Time

Active agent runtime across the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index.

Time per Task

Average agent wall time per task · Lower is better

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. Execution Time

Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index vs. average agent wall time per task
Most attractive quadrant