6 ms·

Fingers crossed for this to work well! Claude Code is pretty excellent. I’m actually legitimately surprised how good it is, since other coding agents I’ve used

Fingers crossed for this to work well! Claude Code is pretty excellent. I’m actually legitimately surprised how good it is, since other coding agents I’ve used before have mostly been a letdown, which made me only use Claude in direct change prompting with Zed (“implement xyz here”, “rewrite this function with abc”, etc), so very hands-on. So I’ve went into trying out Claude Code rather pessimistically, and now I’m using it all the time! Sure, it ends up costing a bunch, but it’s easy to justify $15 for a prompting session if the end result is a mostly complete PR, done much faster. All that is to say - competition is good, fingers crossed for codex!

kurtis_reed 1y ago
Fingers crossed for what?
retinaros 1y ago
too expensive. I cant understand why everyone is into claude code vs using claude in cursor or windsurf.
- _neil 1y ago
  Anecdotally, Claude code performs much better than Claude within Cursor. Not sure if it’s a system prompt thing or if I’ve just convinced myself of it because the aesthetic is so much better, but either way the end result feels better to me.
  - Workaccount2 1y ago
    My choice conspiracy is resource allocation and playing favorites.
  - rafaelmn 1y ago
    One has the incentive to burn through as much tokens and the other has an incentive to use as little as possible
    - _neil 1y ago
      Great point.
- danenania 1y ago
  I think it depends a lot on how you value your time. I'm personally willing to spend hundreds or thousands per month happily if it saves me enough hours. I'd estimate that if I were to do consulting, I'd likely be charging in the $150-250 per hour range, so by my math, it's pretty easy to justify any tools that save me even a few hours per month.
  - _joel 1y ago
    You get the same results for cheaper by using a different tool (Windsurf's better imho).
    - danenania 1y ago
      That may be, but I think tools with a fixed monthly fee are always going to have an incentive to reduce their own costs on the backend and route you toward less capable models, cut down context size, produce less output, stop before the task is truly finished, etc. Given how much time these models can save me, I'd rather optimize for capability and just accept whatever the price is as a cost of doing business. (Within reason I guess—I probably wouldn't go beyond $2-3k per month at this point, unless there was very clear ROI on that spend.) Also, it's not only about saving time. More powerful AI tools allow me to build things it would otherwise be impossible to build... that's just as important as the time/cost equation.
      - _joel 1y ago
        It's literally the same model. I can build more complex stuff in windsurf as the IDE is better than Cline/Roocode integration in vscode. It's still the same model under the hood. Sonnet 202500219 I mean, you pour money down the drain if you think it's helping, have at it :P
        famouswaffles 1y ago
        It's the same model but not necessarily the same context. Like he said, those tools try to be very 'smart' with context to save costs. You're not actually getting all the files you add in the context window, you're getting a RAG'd version of it, which is generally much worse if the un-RAG'd code is still within the effective context limit.
- ChadMoran 1y ago
  Claude Code has been able to produce results equivalent to a junior engineer. I spent about $300 API credits in a month but got the value out of it far surpassing that.
- drusepth 1y ago
  I tried switching from Claude Code to both Cursor and Windsurf. Neither of the latter IDEs fully support MCP implementations (missing basic things like tool definitions and other vital features last time I tried) and both have been riddled with their own agentic flow issues (cursor going down for a week a bit ago, windsurf requiring paid upgrades to "get around" bugs, etc). This is all ignoring the controversies that pop up around e.g. Cursor seemingly every week. As an IDE, they're both getting there -- but I have objectively better results in Claude Code.
- benzible 1y ago
  If you have AWS credits... export CLAUDE_CODE_USE_BEDROCK=1 export ANTHROPIC_MODEL=us.anthropic.claude-3-7-sonnet-20250219-v1:0 export ANTHROPIC_API_TYPE=bedrock
  - register 1y ago
    and where are these export used? Ader?
  - codercotton 1y ago
    Is this for Claude Code?
    - benzible 1y ago
      Yep
- newlisp 1y ago
  Why is using cursor with sonnet cheaper than using claude code?
  - therealmarv 1y ago
    probably because cursor is betting on many paying people not using their tool to full extend. Like people paying on their gym memberships but not going to the gym. Or they are burning VC money.
    - cube2222 1y ago
      I've read anecdotal evidence that it uses tokens more sparingly than Claude Code - supported by the, likewise anecdotal, evidence that Claude Code is more effective in practice. However, that would be reasonable, as basically 1-3 sessions with Claude Code cost what a whole month of Cursor costs.
- tcdent 1y ago
  that's what my Ramp card is for. seriously though, anything that makes me smarter and more productive has a threshold in the thousands-of-dollars range, not hundreds
therealmarv 1y ago
Claude Code has a closed license https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/LICENSE.md https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/LICENSE.... There is fork named Anon Kode https://github.com/dnakov/anon-kode https://github.com/dnakov/anon-kode which can use more models and non-Anthropic ones. But the license is unclear for it. It's interesting to see codex to be Apache License. Maybe somebody extends it to be usable with competing models.
- cube2222 1y ago
  In terms of terminal-based and open-source, I think aider is the most popular one.
  - seunosewa 1y ago
    I didn't like not seeing the reasoning of the models
  - therealmarv 1y ago
    yes! It's great! I like it! But it has one downside: It's not so good on unknown big complex code bases where you don't know how it's structured. I wished they (or somebody else) would add an AI or an automation to add files dynamically or in a smart way when you don't know the codebase structure (with the expense of burning more tokens). I'm thinking Codex (have not checked it yet), Claude Code, Anon Kode and all the AI editors/plugins doing a better job there (and potentially burning more tokens). But that's the only downside I can think of about aider.
    - Firerouge 1y ago
      I was under the impression Aider did exactly what you're describing using it's repo map feature.
      - Tiberium 1y ago
        Not really, repo map only gives LLMs an overview of the codebase, but aider doesn't automatically bring files into the context - you have to explicitly add the files you wish for it to see in their entirety to the context. Claude Code/Codex and most other tools do this automatically, that's why they're much more autonomous.
dzhiurgis 1y ago
I started using claude code everyday. It’s kinda expensive and hallucinates a ton (tho with custom prompt i’ve mostly tamed it). Hope more competition can bring price down.
jwr 1y ago
Seconded. I was surprised by how good Claude Code is, even for less mainstream languages (Clojure). I am happy there is competition!

kurtis_reed 1y ago

Fingers crossed for what?

retinaros 1y ago

too expensive. I cant understand why everyone is into claude code vs using claude in cursor or windsurf.

_neil 1y ago
Anecdotally, Claude code performs much better than Claude within Cursor. Not sure if it’s a system prompt thing or if I’ve just convinced myself of it because the aesthetic is so much better, but either way the end result feels better to me.
- Workaccount2 1y ago
  My choice conspiracy is resource allocation and playing favorites.
- rafaelmn 1y ago
  One has the incentive to burn through as much tokens and the other has an incentive to use as little as possible
  - _neil 1y ago
    Great point.
danenania 1y ago
I think it depends a lot on how you value your time. I'm personally willing to spend hundreds or thousands per month happily if it saves me enough hours. I'd estimate that if I were to do consulting, I'd likely be charging in the $150-250 per hour range, so by my math, it's pretty easy to justify any tools that save me even a few hours per month.
- _joel 1y ago
  You get the same results for cheaper by using a different tool (Windsurf's better imho).
  - danenania 1y ago
    That may be, but I think tools with a fixed monthly fee are always going to have an incentive to reduce their own costs on the backend and route you toward less capable models, cut down context size, produce less output, stop before the task is truly finished, etc. Given how much time these models can save me, I'd rather optimize for capability and just accept whatever the price is as a cost of doing business. (Within reason I guess—I probably wouldn't go beyond $2-3k per month at this point, unless there was very clear ROI on that spend.) Also, it's not only about saving time. More powerful AI tools allow me to build things it would otherwise be impossible to build... that's just as important as the time/cost equation.
    - _joel 1y ago
      It's literally the same model. I can build more complex stuff in windsurf as the IDE is better than Cline/Roocode integration in vscode. It's still the same model under the hood. Sonnet 202500219 I mean, you pour money down the drain if you think it's helping, have at it :P
      - famouswaffles 1y ago
        It's the same model but not necessarily the same context. Like he said, those tools try to be very 'smart' with context to save costs. You're not actually getting all the files you add in the context window, you're getting a RAG'd version of it, which is generally much worse if the un-RAG'd code is still within the effective context limit.
ChadMoran 1y ago
Claude Code has been able to produce results equivalent to a junior engineer. I spent about $300 API credits in a month but got the value out of it far surpassing that.
drusepth 1y ago
I tried switching from Claude Code to both Cursor and Windsurf. Neither of the latter IDEs fully support MCP implementations (missing basic things like tool definitions and other vital features last time I tried) and both have been riddled with their own agentic flow issues (cursor going down for a week a bit ago, windsurf requiring paid upgrades to "get around" bugs, etc). This is all ignoring the controversies that pop up around e.g. Cursor seemingly every week. As an IDE, they're both getting there -- but I have objectively better results in Claude Code.
benzible 1y ago
If you have AWS credits... export CLAUDE_CODE_USE_BEDROCK=1 export ANTHROPIC_MODEL=us.anthropic.claude-3-7-sonnet-20250219-v1:0 export ANTHROPIC_API_TYPE=bedrock
- register 1y ago
  and where are these export used? Ader?
- codercotton 1y ago
  Is this for Claude Code?
  - benzible 1y ago
    Yep
newlisp 1y ago
Why is using cursor with sonnet cheaper than using claude code?
- therealmarv 1y ago
  probably because cursor is betting on many paying people not using their tool to full extend. Like people paying on their gym memberships but not going to the gym. Or they are burning VC money.
  - cube2222 1y ago
    I've read anecdotal evidence that it uses tokens more sparingly than Claude Code - supported by the, likewise anecdotal, evidence that Claude Code is more effective in practice. However, that would be reasonable, as basically 1-3 sessions with Claude Code cost what a whole month of Cursor costs.
tcdent 1y ago
that's what my Ramp card is for. seriously though, anything that makes me smarter and more productive has a threshold in the thousands-of-dollars range, not hundreds

therealmarv 1y ago

Claude Code has a closed license https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/LICENSE.md https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/LICENSE.... There is fork named Anon Kode https://github.com/dnakov/anon-kode https://github.com/dnakov/anon-kode which can use more models and non-Anthropic ones. But the license is unclear for it. It's interesting to see codex to be Apache License. Maybe somebody extends it to be usable with competing models.

cube2222 1y ago
In terms of terminal-based and open-source, I think aider is the most popular one.
- seunosewa 1y ago
  I didn't like not seeing the reasoning of the models
- therealmarv 1y ago
  yes! It's great! I like it! But it has one downside: It's not so good on unknown big complex code bases where you don't know how it's structured. I wished they (or somebody else) would add an AI or an automation to add files dynamically or in a smart way when you don't know the codebase structure (with the expense of burning more tokens). I'm thinking Codex (have not checked it yet), Claude Code, Anon Kode and all the AI editors/plugins doing a better job there (and potentially burning more tokens). But that's the only downside I can think of about aider.
  - Firerouge 1y ago
    I was under the impression Aider did exactly what you're describing using it's repo map feature.
    - Tiberium 1y ago
      Not really, repo map only gives LLMs an overview of the codebase, but aider doesn't automatically bring files into the context - you have to explicitly add the files you wish for it to see in their entirety to the context. Claude Code/Codex and most other tools do this automatically, that's why they're much more autonomous.

dzhiurgis 1y ago

I started using claude code everyday. It’s kinda expensive and hallucinates a ton (tho with custom prompt i’ve mostly tamed it). Hope more competition can bring price down.

jwr 1y ago

Seconded. I was surprised by how good Claude Code is, even for less mainstream languages (Clojure). I am happy there is competition!