
SCI-HUB
Google Scholar
PubMed.gov
Unpaywall
Archive.org
Z-Lib
Papers with Code
arXiv is a free distribution service and an open-access archive for scholarly articles.

Refactor.io
Figstack
PullRequest.com
GitLive
Azure DevOps
codebeat
Promyze
CodeStream helps development teams resolve issues faster, and improve code quality by streamlining code reviews inside your IDE

Which is more popular?
Based on our record, arXiv seems to be more popular. It has been mentioned 334 times since March 2021.
Website, pricing, platforms and company facts side by side.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Website | arxiv.org | codestream.com |
| Pricing | ||
| Listed in |
In their own words, as submitted to SaaSHub.


No description of arXiv yet.
CodeStream enables asynchronous communication among developers on your team, anywhere. Review changes in the context of the full source tree, using your favorite keybindings and environment. Use a simple shortcut to highlight your code and CodeStream will automatically assign a reviewer based on...
What each product offers, as listed by its team.


Possible disadvantages
Possible disadvantages
An editorial look at what each product does well and who it suits.


Overall verdict
Why this product is good
Recommended for
Students, researchers, and academics in scientific fields who are looking for early access to research outputs or wish to publish their own preprints for peer feedback. It's also beneficial for anyone interested in staying up-to-date with cutting-edge developments in science and technology.
Overall verdict
Why this product is good
Recommended for
Development teams who heavily rely on IDEs like Visual Studio Code, IntelliJ, and others. It is particularly useful for remote teams that require robust code review and communication tools to maintain effective collaboration.
Walkthroughs and reviews on video.
How often each product is chosen within a category, 0–100% relative to the other.


Share your experience with using arXiv and CodeStream. For example, how are they different and which one is better?
External articles and on-site reviews we used to compare the two products.


We have no reviews of arXiv yet. Be the first one to post
After using this with my development team for a few weeks, we grew to love it. Product works amazing for its purpose and really helps developers communicate about our code.
Recommendations tracked on public social media and blogs since March 2021.


The evaluation landscape for AI agents saw 45+ new research papers in the past 6 months on arXiv (Cornell University's open-access preprint repository), proposing new metrics for trajectory quality (TRACE), hallucination detection (LSC),... - Source: dev.to / 4 months ago
I depend heavily on arxiv papers for this. Using a SERP API (Bright Data) for Google, running site:arxiv.org plus a well-framed query gets me recent, relevant papers. I’d run four or five of these, collate the results…and then inevitably... - Source: dev.to / 5 months ago
ArXiv — Repositorio del paper "Spec-Driven Development: From Code to Contract in the Age of AI" (enero 2026). - Source: dev.to / 5 months ago
Tracking CodeStream since Mar 2021.
When comparing arXiv and CodeStream, you can also consider the following products.

It provides mass and public access to tens of millions of research papers
Compare SCI-HUB to arXiv or CodeStream:

Share your code instantly for refactoring and code review
Compare Refactor.io to arXiv or CodeStream:

Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly...
Compare Google Scholar to arXiv or CodeStream:


PubMed comprises more than 29 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full-text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.
Compare PubMed.gov to arXiv or CodeStream:
