| Feature | Codeium | Make |
|---|---|---|
| Free Plan | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Pricing | Free / $15/mo | Free / $9–$29/mo |
| Rating | ★★★★☆ 4.4 | ★★★★★ 4.6 |
| Key Feature 1 | Autocomplete | Visual workflow builder |
| Key Feature 2 | Chat in IDE | 1,500+ app connectors |
| Key Feature 3 | Broad Language Support | Error handling |
Reach buyers comparing Codeium and Make. High-intent traffic, direct conversions.
Codeium and Make are rated almost identically by users (4.4 vs 4.6), so the right pick comes down to feature fit rather than overall quality. Both Codeium and Make offer free plans, so you can test both before committing. Both tools are widely used by programmers, startups, freelancers — the deciding factor is usually which specific feature set matches your existing workflow.
Codeium versus Make is one of the more common decisions buyers face — Codeium is built around coding tools while Make leans toward productivity tools. Codeium is best known for autocomplete, whereas Make stands out for visual workflow builder. On aggregate user ratings Make holds a slight edge (4.4/5 vs 4.6/5), though that gap rarely decides the match on its own.
Where Codeium pulls clearly ahead is getting unlimited inline code completions in any IDE for free. A frequent plus in reviews: Free tier includes comprehensive features and requires no payment information to get started. Make, by contrast, is the stronger choice for building complex multi-branch automation with conditional logic. In its favour: More powerful than Zapier — especially for visual workflow builder workflows where Make consistently outperforms manual approaches. The feature checklists overlap, but the day-to-day experience does not.
Codeium is the strongest free AI coding tool — unlimited completions with no credit cap puts it ahead of GitHub Copilot's free tier for individual developers. Make is the right automation tool for anyone who has hit Zapier's complexity ceiling. Bottom line: the "better" tool here is the one that fits the work you do most.
Choose Codeium if you are focused on individual developers and students who want AI code completion across all their IDEs and languages without paying a subscription — and teams looking for a cost-effective enterprise alternative to GitHub Copilot, or if a big part of your week goes to using AI chat to explain code, generate tests, and debug errors. Its free tier also lets you validate the fit before paying.
Choose Make if your priority is technical users, developers, and operations teams who need complex automation with branching logic, data transformation, and multi-step processes — and who find Zapier too simple, especially for transforming and mapping data between apps with custom formulas. A free plan is available, so you can trial the workflow at zero cost first.
Real-world output tracks the ratings closely: Codeium at 4.4/5 and Make at 4.6/5, with the difference showing up most in getting unlimited inline code completions in any IDE for free.
Learning curve is worth weighing. Codeium has a known trade-off — Weaker reasoning and contextual understanding compared to some premium alternatives like Copilot. On Make's side: Steeper learning curve — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case. Factor in the integrations you already rely on — that usually settles which one sticks after the trial.
Both tools offer a free plan, so you can trial each side by side before spending anything. Paid plans start at $12/user/mo for Codeium (Teams) and $9/mo for Make (Core), making Make the cheaper entry point at $9/mo versus $12/user/mo. The extra spend on Codeium only pays off if you need what its higher tier unlocks.
🚀 Ready to decide? Try both free and see which fits your workflow.
Codeium is a free AI code completion and chat tool that works across 70+ programming languages and all major IDEs — VS Code, JetBrains, Vim,… Read the full Codeium review →
Make (formerly Integromat) is a visual automation platform connecting 1,800+ apps through a drag-and-drop scenario builder. Unlike Zapier's … Read the full Make review →
• Free tier includes comprehensive features and requires no payment information to get started.
• Supports a wide range of programming languages, making it adaptable for various projects.
• Fast and responsive autocomplete, reducing downtime and coding bottlenecks.
• Integrates smoothly with major editors, ensuring minimal disruption to existing workflows.
• Weaker reasoning and contextual understanding compared to some premium alternatives like Copilot.
• Relatively smaller context window limits performance on projects with large codebases.
• More powerful than Zapier — especially for visual workflow builder workflows where Make consistently outperforms manual approaches
• Practical free tier that lets you validate the tool before committing to paid plans
• Highly customizable and flexible, allowing users to create complex automations tailored to their specific needs
• Cost-effective for high-volume automations, with a pricing model based on operations rather than tasks
• Steeper learning curve — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case
• UI can be complex — worth evaluating before committing if this is central to your use case