OpenHands vs Cline - chunhualiao/public-docs GitHub Wiki

agent>

Cline and OpenHands are both AI-powered coding tools, but they have some key differences:

Similarities:

  1. Both utilize advanced language models for code assistance.
  2. They aim to enhance developer productivity and code quality.
  3. Both can integrate with multiple AI models through OpenRouter.

Differences:

  1. Integration: Cline is a VS Code extension, while OpenHands is an open-source framework[1][6].
  2. Model flexibility: Cline allows users to choose from various AI models through OpenRouter, including free options[1][3]. OpenHands is specifically optimized for Claude-3.5.
  3. Functionality: Cline focuses on real-time code assistance and suggestions within the editor[1][3]. OpenHands is designed to solve real-world GitHub issues and has a broader scope of software engineering tasks[4].
  4. Performance benchmarks: OpenHands + CodeAct v2.1 has demonstrated specific performance metrics on SWE-Bench, while Cline's performance is typically described in more general terms[4][6].
  5. Pricing model: Cline uses a token-based pricing model, which can be expensive for continuous use[1]. OpenHands, being open-source, likely has different cost considerations.
  6. User interface: Cline provides a more integrated coding experience within VS Code, with features like real-time edits and a cancel button[3]. OpenHands may have a different interface focused on solving GitHub issues.

Cline's popularity on OpenRouter likely stems from its flexibility in model selection and its seamless integration with VS Code, making it accessible to a wide range of developers[1][3][6].

Aspect OpenHands VS Code + Cline
Architecture Autonomous agent, checklist-driven, generates PRs automatically VS Code extension, human-in-the-loop, incremental task execution
Workflow End-to-end task completion, holistic code generation Step-by-step execution, requires user approval for changes
Speed Faster, handles multiple steps in one prompt Slower due to user oversight, granular approach
Task Scope Excels in complex, architecture-heavy tasks Best for smaller, incremental tasks with meticulous oversight
IDE Integration Standalone, flexible across environments, less seamless in VS Code Tightly integrated with VS Code (diff views, timeline, terminal)
Natural Language Supports natural language prompts Supports natural language prompts
File/Terminal Interaction Reads/writes files, executes terminal commands, focuses on PRs Creates/edits files, runs terminal commands with approval, monitors linter outputs
Browser Automation Supports basic web tasks (clicking, screenshots) Advanced automation with Claude 3.5 Sonnet, supports runtime debugging
Extensibility Limited customization, focused on core features Highly extensible via Model Context Protocol (MCP) for custom tools/APIs
Context Handling May crash at 200k tokens unless truncated Manages context well, truncates at 200k–225k tokens to prevent crashes
Pricing Free (open-source), costs depend on AI provider, less token optimization Free (open-source), token-based, tracks usage, can cost ~$20/day
Open-Source Yes, hosted under All-Hands-AI, rapid development Yes, on GitHub, slower development, less open to external contributions
Community Active, rapid feature addition, less rigorous testing Growing, stable, but only 5% PRs accepted, leading to forks like Roo Code
Use Case Large-scale tasks, PR generation, less granular control Incremental tasks, transparency, granular control, VS Code-centric workflows

Citations: