Copilot Fusion title card over a Copilot prompt box with the Standard, High and Max effort levels

Copilot Fusion: How GitHub Picks AI Models for You, and How It Compares With Claude Code

Key takeaways

  • Copilot Fusion picks models for you from three effort levels: Standard, High and Max.
  • Fusion Max scored 60 vs. Claude Code’s 62 at about half the cost per task.
  • No extra fee; model costs are 30% off on paid plans through Nov. 30, 2026.
Copilot Fusion title card over a Copilot prompt box with the Standard, High and Max effort levels
Copilot Fusion title card

GitHub’s Copilot Fusion, unveiled at GitHub Universe 2026, picks AI models for you: you set how hard the task is, and it routes the work. When you code with several models, such as Claude Opus, Sonnet or GPT-6, switching between them for a quick fix versus a nasty bug gets tedious.

Fusion removes that step. In the Artificial Analysis coding-agent test, it came within two points of Claude Code at about half the cost per task.

GitHub changelog banner reading HydraFusion updates and new Max option
HydraFusion updates and new Max option banner. Image: GitHub

Pick an effort level, not a model

Copilot Fusion merges Project HydraFusion, which ran as a research preview, with Copilot’s automatic model selection. It works in the tools you already use:

  • VS Code
  • The GitHub Copilot app
  • Copilot CLI
  • JetBrains IDEs

If you had already picked Auto, HydraFusion or HydraFusion Max, that choice moves to the matching Fusion effort level on its own.

Instead of comparing models one by one, you choose an effort level: Standard, High or Max.

GitHub Copilot Fusion is generally available banner with the effort level menu
Copilot Fusion general availability banner. Image: GitHub

Standard is for everyday code and simple questions, balancing response speed and cost. High fits changes across several files or bugs whose cause is hard to find.

Fusion effort menu showing Standard, High and Max with a tooltip for High
Fusion effort levels in the agent menu. Image: GitHub

Max, the top level, is for complex work such as architecture design, and it leans hard on frontier-class models. You don’t have to switch models yourself: Fusion picks what fits the difficulty.

Copilot prompt box with Copilot Fusion turned on and the Max effort level selected
Copilot Fusion effort level menu set to Max. Image: GitHub

Single, Cascade and Critique: how Copilot Fusion runs a task

Once you set the effort level and send a prompt, Copilot Fusion looks at how hard the request is and whether it needs tools. It then picks one of three execution patterns: Single, Cascade or Critique.

The choice isn’t locked for the whole conversation. Fusion decides again for every prompt, so one chat can use different patterns depending on what you ask.

GitHub diagram of the Single, Cascade and Critique execution patterns in Copilot Fusion
Copilot Fusion's three execution patterns. Image: GitHub

In Single, one model handles the job from start to finish, used for easier work like syntax questions or a simple function. In Cascade, a lighter model drafts first and another model checks it. If the draft passes, it’s done; if not, a stronger model takes over. Starting small saves money.

In Critique, several helper models review the main model’s output in parallel, and the main model revises based on their combined feedback. That suits work that needs careful review, like refactoring across many files or a complex design change.

PatternHow it worksBest for
SingleOne model finishes the taskSyntax questions, single-file edits
CascadeDraft is checked, then accepted or escalatedMedium difficulty, conditionally complex work
CritiqueSeveral models review in parallel, then reviseMulti-file edits, architecture redesigns

Copilot Fusion vs. Claude Code: score and cost

On the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index v2.0, Fusion Max scored 60 overall. Claude Code running Claude Opus 5.5 Max scored 62, a gap of just two points.

Cost was a different story. Average API cost per task was $11.42 for Claude Code and $5.59 for Fusion Max, about 51% less. Fusion Max also used about 7.2 million tokens per task, roughly half of Claude Code, and completed tasks in about 40% less time.

Bar chart: average API cost per task, Claude Code with Opus 5.5 Max $11.42, Copilot Fusion Max $5.59
Two bars labeled Claude Code and Copilot Fusion Max. Source: Artificial Analysis, average API cost per task

The detailed tests split. On Terminal-Bench 4.0, which measures terminal and tool use, Fusion scored 71 and ranked first overall. On FrontierCode, which tests understanding of complex code context, it scored 51, behind Claude Code (56) and Devin Fusion (54).

Combining models helps on cost and time, but when a task means following complex code through a long chain of reasoning, one strong model may still be the better choice.

Bar chart of FrontierCode scores: Claude Code 56, Devin Fusion 54, Copilot Fusion 51
Bar chart of FrontierCode scores for three agents. Source: Artificial Analysis

Can you use local AI models?

On Windows PCs that meet the requirements, you can download MAI Code 1.1 Flash through the Windows ML provider and connect it to Copilot Fusion. The model uses a mixture-of-experts (MoE) design that activates only 6.8 billion of its 137 billion parameters.

Copilot prompt with Copilot Fusion using the Windows ML provider and the MAI Code 1.1 Flash model
Copilot Fusion set to a local MAI Code 1.1 Flash model. Image: GitHub

Quantization at about 3.3 bits per weight shrinks it to 53GB, and it processes prompts at 923.5 tokens per second with a 64K context.

GitHub Copilot Fusion now supports selection of local models banner
Local model support banner. Image: GitHub

The hardware bar is high, though. AMD graphics cards aren’t supported, and you need an NVIDIA GPU, at least 96GB of free memory and 60GB or more of storage. Microsoft itself recommends more than 120GB of RAM for the best performance, so a typical development laptop won’t cut it.

Connecting a local model doesn’t make everything offline. Code is generated on your PC, but the meta-routing step that judges difficulty and assigns models runs in GitHub’s cloud. Fusion mainly picks the local model at the Standard effort level.

Copilot CLI model picker listing MAI Code 1.1 Flash as a local model with system requirements
MAI Code 1.1 Flash in the Copilot CLI model picker. Image: GitHub

Pricing and what to know before you start

Copilot Fusion itself costs nothing extra. You pay each model’s standard rate for the calls it makes during a task, and paid-plan users get 30% off model costs through Nov. 30, 2026.

The context window has a catch too. Fusion has no context window of its own and follows the smallest limit among the models in the task, so in long chats or large projects, earlier context can drop out sooner than you expect.

Diagram: several models join a task, Fusion uses the smallest context limit, earlier context drops sooner in long sessions
Three-step diagram of Fusion's context window. Illustration based on GitHub Docs

Watch file edits as well. In Cascade or Critique, if a draft model changes files and another model then rejects the result, the saved changes are not rolled back automatically.

So review the diff after the AI edits code. Making a Git commit before important work also makes it easy to roll back if something goes wrong.

Diagram: a draft model edits files, a judge rejects the draft, the edits stay, so commit first and review the diff
Four numbered boxes connected by arrows. Illustration based on GitHub Docs

Which effort level should you use?

Pick by the shape of the task, not by the model name. If most of your day is small edits, quick questions and single-file fixes, leave it on Standard and let Fusion keep costs down.

Switch to High or Max for hard bugs and refactoring, but for work that means following complex code through a long chain of reasoning, keep a single strong model in reach. If you use coding AI a lot, run the same real task both ways and compare the cost and the result.

GitHub Copilot in VS Code, Universe releases banner
Copilot in VS Code Universe releases banner. Image: GitHub

Related reading

Sources

Share this article

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *