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

AWS CodeCommit vs GitHub comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 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

AWS CodeCommit
Ranking in Version Control
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
GitHub
Ranking in Version Control
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 6.7%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub is 5.9%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Version Control
 

Featured Reviews

Munisaiteja Narravula - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient integration of code changes with seamless private repository management
AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly. It doesn't require any complex authentication, which makes the process seamless. Deployments happen in a straightforward manner once the code is organized correctly in the repository. The platform allows the creation of private repositories, securing and restricting access to our team members only. This ensures that unauthorized users cannot access sensitive files. AWS CodeCommit also integrates well when we use it with Check Point allowing us to implement information in the criteria we need.
Pervez Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Very good for collaboration on software projects
We use GitHub for code repository alongside Bitbucket GitHub is very good for collaboration on software projects. We prefer Bitbucket for commercial use, while GitHub is used for open source. You can get the differences, history of changes, and version control for various pull requests. You can…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It helps us to install our code idea projects."
"AWS CodeCommit's user interface is nice, and it's easy for people to pick up."
"The customer service is pretty good."
"The solution is quite scalable."
"AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap."
"The most valuable feature of AWS CodeCommit is that it acts as a code repository with code versioning and approval features similar to those found on GitHub."
"AWS CodeCommit is much easier to use than Bitbucket. It doesn't require any personal password or these things. We just need to put in our AWS account password and username."
"AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly."
"This solution is very easy to use which I like about it. The capacity to own artifacts and share them with others is another good feature. You don't have to write all your code from scratch, you can use available templates and alter the code according to your needs."
"GitHub Actions, specifically in the DevOps field, have been extremely valuable."
"GitHub is good for small companies and for personal use."
"The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code."
"Our code is secure."
"I use this solution to store my code in a repository so we can manage version control which is useful."
"The flexibility of this solution has been most valuable. It operates on a pay per use basis where you can ramp up or decrease usage."
"The most valuable features are GitHub are the standard features, they are very useful."
 

Cons

"Although CodeCommit's user interface is good, it can be improved when compared to other version controls like GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket."
"Although CodeCommit's user interface is good, it can be improved when compared to other version controls like GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket."
"There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics."
"The tool should improve its UI."
"Not really that much stands out. I am using CodeCommit since my customer asked me to use it. It is just an appliance, and GitHub and GitLab can do a better job."
"When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide."
"There is room for improvement in how AWS CodeCommit handles mass changes, like Fortran, which is designed to make these alterations in a friendly manner across AWS requirements."
"Migration in and out of CodeCommit should be improved."
"From the recruiting standpoint, I would like to see email IDs and phone numbers and a brief introduction about their profile."
"There is room for improvement in terms of interface."
"The documentation needs to be more concise and easier for developers to understand."
"There could be more integration into Azure."
"GitHub could automate the setup process more, such as creating YAML files for GitHub Actions."
"I would want to see some form of code security scanning implemented."
"If you are uploading or cloning a large file, with more than 25 megs, it's pretty slow."
"The merging features can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As for pricing, you can add the table in detail. You can visit Bitbucket or refer to any other tools. There, you can see what is the difference between your pricing and other prices. You have only mentioned it in a single line. Other tools have been mentioned in a table format, like, how many users, premium, normal accounts, and other things."
"The solution is expensive."
"AWS CodeCommit is competitively priced against all the other competitors."
"GitHub is an open-source application. It's free to use."
"I am using the free version of the solution. However, there are some costs my organization pays."
"It’s an open-source solution."
"The price of this solution is reasonable."
"I use the free version of the tool."
"If I consider the market standards, the product's price is pocket-friendly."
"I think, in terms of price, GitHub is okay compared to other tools."
"We have an enterprise licensing agreement, and I am not part of the finance department so I can't say how much it costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Version Control solutions are best for your needs.
842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS CodeCommit?
Lately, it is turning out to be a little expensive. The market is preferring Azure because it offers resources at a much cheaper price. Compared to Azure, AWS is more expensive, and that's the trend.
What needs improvement with AWS CodeCommit?
There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics. A built-in dashboard with advanced analytics, like commit frequencies and pull request trends, could be added. These features would help gain dee...
What do you like most about GitHub?
The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub?
The pricing of GitHub depends on the choice of solutions, such as building one's own GitHub Runners to save money or using GitHub's Runners with extra costs. The pricing is considered reasonable an...
What needs improvement with GitHub?
There are still areas for improvement with GitHub Actions and their deployment workflows, as they have made significant progress but are not yet polished. Occasionally, stability can be an issue, t...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

CodeCommit
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Gett, ClicksMob
Dominion Enterprises, NASA, Braintree, SAP, CyberAgent
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodeCommit vs. GitHub and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,767 professionals have used our research since 2012.