F-11 · What AI Saves

How much faster do developers code with AI assistants?

Randomized trials inside companies find gains of about 21 to 26 percent. Across all studies the results run from 19 percent slower, for experienced developers in their own mature codebases, to 56 percent faster on one simple lab task, so the evidence conflicts.

21–26% faster, or more tasks done, in randomized trials inside companies

Across all 5 studies: from 19% slower to 56% faster.

  • Medium confidence
  • 5 primary sources
  • 2023 to 2026
  • Last checked

Every study on one scale

Chart of % faster or more tasks done (negative means slower): Peng et al., lab task 55.8% faster; Cui et al., three companies 26% more pull requests; Paradis et al., Google 21–26% faster; METR, 2025 19% slower; METR, late-2025 rerun 4–18% faster (not significant). Shaded range 21–26% in company trials. 21–26% in company trials all studies -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% Peng et al., lab task, 2023 55.8% faster Cui et al., three companies, 2025 26% more pull requests Paradis et al., Google, 2024 21–26% faster METR, 2025, 2025 19% slower METR, late-2025 rerun, 2026 4–18% faster (not significant)
Shaded: 21–26% in company trials Dashed: all studies One figure A range in one study
Chart values as text
  • Scale: % faster or more tasks done (negative means slower). Shaded range: 21–26% in company trials; dashed, all studies: -19% to 56%.
  • Peng et al., lab task (2023): 55.8% faster
  • Cui et al., three companies (2025): 26% more pull requests
  • Paradis et al., Google (2024): 21–26% faster
  • METR, 2025 (2025): 19% slower
  • METR, late-2025 rerun (2026): 4–18% faster (not significant)

Why medium confidence: Five randomized studies from four independent groups agree that the effect depends on the task and the developer. The two company estimates are close but have wide margins of error and measure different things, and the studies disagree on the sign for experienced developers in familiar codebases.

Sources

Sources for F-11
StudyCreatorYearSampleMethodFigureLink
The Impact of AI on Developer Productivity: Evidence from GitHub Copilot Sida Peng (Microsoft Research), Eirini Kalliamvakou and Peter Cihon (GitHub), Mert Demirer (MIT Sloan) 2023 95 freelance developers recruited on Upwork, mostly in India and Pakistan Controlled experiment, 2022, on one task: writing a basic HTTP server in JavaScript 55.8% less time (71 minutes against 161); 95% confidence interval 21% to 89% “the treated group completed the task 55.8% faster (95% confidence interval: 21-89%)”
The Effects of Generative AI on High-Skilled Work: Evidence from Three Field Experiments with Software Developers Kevin Zheyuan Cui, Mert Demirer, Sonia Jaffe, Leon Musolff, Sida Peng and Tobias Salz (Princeton, MIT, Microsoft, Wharton) 2025 4,867 developers at Microsoft, Accenture and a Fortune 100 electronics maker Three randomized experiments run by the companies over 2 to 8 months, pooled. Counts output; does not time tasks. 26.08% more completed pull requests a week for developers who used GitHub Copilot (standard error 10.3%) “our analysis reveals a 26.08% increase (SE: 10.3%) in completed tasks among”
How much does AI impact development speed? An enterprise-based randomized controlled trial Elise Paradis, Satish Chandra and colleagues (Google) 2024 96 full-time Google software engineers Randomized trial on one enterprise task in Google's own tools, 2024. Google evaluated its own tools. About 21% less time (21% to 26% across models); 96 minutes with AI against 114 without “this main effect was robust to covariates, making developers between 21% and 26% faster.”
Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer Productivity Joel Becker, Nate Rush, Beth Barnes and David Rein (METR) 2025 16 experienced developers, 246 real tasks in mature open-source projects they had worked on for about 5 years Randomized at the task level, February to June 2025, mostly Cursor with Claude 3.5 and 3.7 Sonnet 19% more time per task with AI (95% confidence interval +2% to +39%) “we find that allowing AI actually increases completion time by 19%”
We are Changing our Developer Productivity Experiment Design METR 2026 57 developers (10 from the first study, 47 new), more than 800 tasks Same design from August 2025. Many developers declined tasks without AI, so METR calls the estimates unreliable. 18% less time for returning developers and 4% less for new ones; both margins of error include zero “Among newly-recruited developers the estimated speedup is -4%”
Who gains

Which developers gain the most from AI?

Newer and more junior ones, in the three-company trials: developers with short tenure raised output 27% to 39%, against 8% to 13% for long-tenured colleagues, and junior developers 21% to 40% against 7% to 16% for senior ones. These splits are not statistically significant on their own. F-12 compares the pattern across studies.

Newer tools

Do newer AI coding agents make developers faster?

There is no clean measurement yet. METR's late-2025 rerun, with 57 developers, estimated 4% to 18% less time with AI, but both estimates sit within the margin of error. Many developers declined to do tasks without AI, which METR says biases the data.

Numbers you may have seen

These figures circulate widely. Here is what the original source says.

More from What AI Saves

The whole chapter · Chapter poster · All of The AI at Work Fact Book