GitHub Copilot vs Codeium: AI Code Completion Compared

Why This Comparison Matters

AI code completion is no longer a novelty. It is infrastructure. Most professional developers use some form of AI assistance, and the two most prominent options are GitHub Copilot and Codeium (now Windsurf). Copilot has the backing of Microsoft and OpenAI. Codeium has bootstrapped its way to relevance with an aggressive free tier and a focus on speed.

We tested both tools over four weeks, writing production code in TypeScript, Python, Go, Rust, and SQL. We tracked suggestion accuracy, latency, context awareness, and the subjective experience of coding with each tool active.

Setup and IDE Support

Both tools install as extensions in VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, and Neovim. Copilot also works in Visual Studio, Xcode (beta), and Cursor. Codeium supports Eclipse and Emacs in addition to the standard set.

Installation is straightforward for both. Copilot requires a GitHub account and active subscription. Codeium requires a Codeium account. Both authenticate via browser-based OAuth flows.

Codeium has broader IDE coverage, which matters if you work outside the mainstream editors.

Suggestion Quality: TypeScript

TypeScript is where both tools perform best, likely due to the volume of TypeScript in their training data.

We wrote a REST API controller and tracked how many suggestions we accepted versus dismissed:

Copilot had a higher raw acceptance rate. The difference was most noticeable in type inference — Copilot more consistently suggested the correct generic types for utility functions and API responses. Codeium occasionally defaulted to any where Copilot inferred the proper type.

// Prompt: function to validate and transform API input
// Copilot suggestion:
function validateInput<T extends z.ZodSchema>(
  schema: T,
  data: unknown
): z.infer<T> {
  const result = schema.safeParse(data);
  if (!result.success) {
    throw new ValidationError(result.error.flatten());
  }
  return result.data;
}

// Codeium suggestion:
function validateInput(schema: any, data: any) {
  const result = schema.safeParse(data);
  if (!result.success) {
    throw new Error(JSON.stringify(result.error));
  }
  return result.data;
}

Both suggestions are functional. Copilot's is production-ready. Codeium's needs type annotations added manually.

Suggestion Quality: Python

Python results were closer. Both tools handled standard library usage, pandas operations, and Django/FastAPI patterns well. Copilot had a slight edge with type hints in Python, mirroring the TypeScript pattern.

Where Codeium surprised us was in data science contexts. When working with numpy and matplotlib, Codeium's suggestions were marginally better — possibly because Codeium's training pipeline places additional emphasis on data science libraries.

Suggestion Quality: Go and Rust

Go is a language where AI completion shines because of Go's explicit, repetitive patterns. Both tools handled error checking idioms, struct definitions, and interface implementations well. We saw no meaningful quality difference in Go.

Rust was a different story. Copilot handled borrow checker patterns more reliably. Codeium frequently suggested code that would not compile due to ownership issues. In a two-hour Rust session, we encountered 14 compile-failing suggestions from Codeium versus 6 from Copilot. Neither is perfect, but Copilot's Rust support is measurably better.

Latency

Codeium is faster. Across all languages and IDEs, Codeium suggestions appeared roughly 80-150ms before Copilot's. This is a small absolute difference, but it affects the feel of the tool — Codeium's completions arrive while you are still forming the next thought, while Copilot sometimes arrives just late enough to interrupt your flow.

Codeium credits this to their custom inference infrastructure, which they claim is optimized specifically for code completion latency rather than general-purpose text generation.

Context Awareness

Copilot has access to your GitHub repositories (with appropriate permissions), which means it can understand project patterns even before you open files. In practice, we found this mattered most in monorepos where Copilot referenced patterns from packages we had not opened.

Codeium's context is limited to currently open files and recently viewed files. It builds a local index but does not connect to remote repositories. For single-repo projects, this is rarely a limitation. For multi-repo workflows, Copilot has an advantage.

Chat and Beyond Completion

Both tools now offer chat interfaces. Copilot Chat is integrated deeply into VS Code with inline suggestions, terminal command generation, and workspace-wide Q&A. Codeium's chat (branded as Windsurf) is comparable in features but felt slightly less polished in our testing — responses were occasionally slower and formatting was inconsistent.

Copilot's /fix and /explain commands in the chat are genuinely useful. Highlighting a failing test and typing /fix produced correct fixes roughly 70% of the time. Codeium has similar commands but the success rate was closer to 55% in our testing.

Pricing and Value

Codeium's free tier is genuinely unlimited for completions — there are no artificial caps on the core autocomplete feature. Copilot's free tier, while generous, does hit a wall for heavy users.

The paid tiers flip the script. Copilot Pro is cheaper than Codeium's paid plan and includes more features (Copilot Chat, Copilot in CLI). Codeium's paid plans add features like codebase-wide search and advanced chat, but the value proposition is less clear when Copilot undercuts on price.

Privacy

Codeium has historically marketed itself as the privacy-focused alternative. Individual plans do not use your code for training. Copilot Business and Enterprise plans also exclude code from training, but individual Copilot plans include a telemetry opt-out that is less comprehensive.

For organizations with strict data handling requirements, both tools offer adequate controls on their business tiers. On free and individual plans, Codeium's privacy stance is stronger.

Who Should Use What

Choose Copilot if:

• You want the highest suggestion quality, particularly for TypeScript and Rust
• You value the integrated chat experience in VS Code
• You work across multiple repositories on GitHub
• You prefer paying less for the premium tier

Choose Codeium if:

• You want a strong free tier with no completion limits
• You use Eclipse, Emacs, or other niche IDEs
• Suggestion latency is important to your workflow
• You prioritize data privacy on individual plans

The Verdict

Copilot is the more capable tool. Its suggestions are more accurate, its context awareness is deeper, and its chat features are more polished. But Codeium is remarkably competitive given its free tier. If you are a student, hobbyist, or someone who codes occasionally, Codeium is the better deal by far. If you write code for a living and the marginal quality improvement translates to real time savings, Copilot's $10/month is money well spent.

Both tools will continue improving rapidly. Codeium's latency advantage and Copilot's quality advantage are both real, and both matter. Your choice depends on which tradeoff you prefer.

Get GitHub Copilot · Try Codeium Free