Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon Q vs Claude for Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon Q
Ranking in AI Code Assistants
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
3.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Claude for Enterprise
Ranking in AI Code Assistants
6th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
AI-Powered Chatbots (7th), AI Writing Tools (7th), Large Language Models (LLMs) (5th), AI Proofreading Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the AI Code Assistants category, the mindshare of Amazon Q is 7.1%. The mindshare of Claude for Enterprise is 10.5%, up from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
AI Code Assistants Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Amazon Q7.1%
Claude for Enterprise10.5%
Other82.4%
AI Code Assistants
 

Featured Reviews

Jayesh Patil - PeerSpot reviewer
Connectors and guardrails facilitate question-answer setups effectively
There isn't such an issue we have faced with Amazon Q regarding speed increasing. Syncing and indexing takes a lot of time, and they need to improve upon that. Remaining everything is good for us, and that is also acceptable as we can set it as a nightly job. Once it's done, it takes around one hour max for any number of documents. We were trying to address specific issues and challenges by implementing Amazon Q in our environment because currently, they don't provide any APIs directly. We find it difficult to integrate with our product. The second challenge is while connecting Jira, we need the ACLs to maintain our security, but it doesn't allow us to connect to Jira if our ACLs are on. We need to turn them off to connect to it. Even though we connected with the support team of AWS, they were not able to resolve our issue, so we were disappointed at that moment. As a part of improvement, we don't see any improvement areas for Amazon Q at present. We first need to test that we can integrate it with our product. We need the APIs before we can suggest improvements.
Nishant Thakkar - PeerSpot reviewer
Data visualization and workflow efficiency improve with automated features
I do not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer, and I was not offered a gift card or incentive for this review. We use other tech products such as Microsoft Excel and Slack. We can use my real name when publishing my review, along with my real company name. On a scale of 1-10, I rate Claude an 8.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The best feature of Amazon Q is the voice chat, where it talks back to you in normal language and you can query it."
"Once the configuration is complete, users can manage all Kubernetes clusters using Amazon Q prompt, and when checking pods in the Kubernetes cluster, there is no need to use commands as users can simply write a prompt like 'Please show me the Kubernetes pods and namespace and all,' and Amazon Q automatically provides all the required details."
"The best feature of Amazon Q is that it has knowledge of my entire code base, entire repository, and its flows."
"The benefits of Amazon Q are that you don't need to build any code base at the backend to develop your RAG system or AI LLM-based summarization systems to do question-answer sets on the documents."
"Amazon Q saved my time more than other products, such as GitHub Copilot, because it is conscious about particular AWS services."
"What I find best about Amazon Q is that I have used multiple AI tools such as Copilot and earlier Chat GPT, and I think that, apart from the other tools, Amazon Q has an edge because if I want to run any command, such as scanning my whole database and checking schemas, it can generate the command and ask for permission whether I want to execute it."
"The best feature Amazon Q offers is the code security scan, which actually depicts the threat assessment of the code or whether a particular code snippet can be utilized by attackers to find loopholes."
"The insight capability is specifically the best one because if searching for data, it will take some amount of time and can be really complex manually; with Amazon Q, it was able to give me quick insights in a couple of seconds with summarized results, which is something really amazing."
"Overall, I rate Claude nine out of ten."
"Claude saves me significant time when conducting research or writing quick Python scripts."
"Claude has positively impacted my organization, as evident from the metrics which show productivity doubling and turnaround time being cut in half."
 

Cons

"Even though we connected with the support team of AWS, they were not able to resolve our issue, so we were disappointed at that moment."
"While great for standard tasks, it sometimes struggles with more complex or multi-layered problems in large code bases."
"One most important improvement would be having deeper domain-specific intelligence for Amazon Q."
"I discovered that the application logs me out automatically after some time, which becomes problematic as I then lose access to my chat history."
"Sometimes feedback is needed immediately. It takes a bit of time because there is a workload."
"If I start with a prompt in one tab and then try to continue in another, it does not retain that context."
"If I start with a prompt in one tab and then try to continue in another, it does not retain that context."
"The model is not able to give answers properly with the traffic it is facing, so it needs to be scaled more."
"The product could be improved by offering automatic integration with other solutions, such as the ability to read Excel or text files and automate processes this way."
"The foundational model would have to be improved to be comparable to ChatGPT for everyday use cases."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which AI Code Assistants solutions are best for your needs.
872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise12
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon Q?
While using Amazon Q, I faced some challenges, such as navigating the interface initially.
What is your primary use case for Amazon Q?
I have completed a project where the company required testing R&D on Kubernetes. I tested it locally by installing MiniKube, Kubernetes, and all the containers. I configured the Kubernetes MCB ...
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon Q?
I find Amazon Q easy to use, and I believe anyone can use it without needing extensive technical knowledge. I would definitely recommend Amazon Q to other people; it's a great tool. I find it quite...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Claude?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was straightforward without running into major challenges.
What needs improvement with Claude?
I face issues with Claude halting or hallucinating occasionally, as it happens with some projects but not all.
What is your primary use case for Claude?
I use Claude, particularly its artifact features, for data visualization. On a weekly basis, we create newsletters for our clients that require beautiful and good-looking presentations, particularl...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Q vs. Claude for Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.