5 ms·
I've found myself having brand loyalty to Claude. I don't really trust any of the other models with coding, the only one I even let close to my work is Claude.
by sali0 1y ago
I've found myself having brand loyalty to Claude. I don't really trust any of the other models with coding, the only one I even let close to my work is Claude. And this is after trying most of them. Looking forward to trying 4.
- javier2 1y agoI wouldn't go as far, but I actually have some loyalty to Claude as well. Don't even know why, as I think the differences are marginal.
- bckr 1y agoIt’s possible to get to know the quirks of these models and intuit what will and won’t work, and how to overcome those limitations. It’s also possible to just get to know, like, and trust their voice. I’m certain that brand awareness is also a factor for me in preferring Claude over ChatGPT etc
- anal_reactor 1y agoI've been initially fascinated by Claude, but then I found myself drawn to Deepseek. My use case is different though, I want someone to talk to.
- miroljub 1y agoI also use DeepSeek R1 as a daily driver. Combined with Qwen3 when I need better tool usage. Now that both Google and Claude are out, I expect to see DeepSeek R2 released very soon. It would be funny to watch an actual open source model getting close to the commercial competition.
- ashirviskas 1y agoHave you compared R1 with V3-0324?
- miroljub 1y agoR1 takes more time to answer, but I don't remember a single case where I actually compared answers where R1 was worse than pure V3. And I don't even have to wait that long. If I watch the thinking, I can spot quickly it misunderstood me and rephrase the question without even waiting for the full response.
- jabroni_salad 1y agoA nice thing about Deepseek is that it is so cheap to run. It's nice being able to explore conversational trees without getting a $12 bill at the end of it.
- MattSayar 1y agoSame. And I JUST tried their GitHub Action agentic thing yesterday (wrote about it here[0]), and it honestly didn't perform very well. I should try it again with Claude 4 and see if there are any differences. Should be an easy test [0] https://mattsayar.com/personalized-software-really-is-coming-but-not-today-maybe-tomorrow/ https://mattsayar.com/personalized-software-really-is-coming...
- WillPostForFood 1y agoIt would be pretty funny if your "not today. Maybe tomorrow" proposition actually did happen the next day.
- MattSayar 1y agoIt literally almost did!
- fivestones 1y agoDid you try it? Were the results any better?
- kilroy123 1y agoThe new Gemini models are very good too.
- pvg 1y agoAs the poet wrote: I prefer MapQuest that's a good one, too Google Maps is the best true that double true!
- alex1138 1y agoI think "Kagi Code" or whatever it's called is using Claude
- SkyPuncher 1y agoGemini is _very_ good at architecture level thinking and implementation. I tend to find that I use Gemini for the first pass, then switch to Claude for the actual line-by-line details. Claude is also far superior at writing specs than Gemini.
- vFunct 1y agoYah Claude tends to output 1200+ line architectural specification documents while Gemini tends to output ~600 line. (I just had to write 100+ architectural spec documents for 100+ different apps) Not sure why Claude is more thorough and complete than the other models, but it's my go-to model for large projects. The OpenAI model outputs are always the smallest - 500 lines or so. Not very good at larger projects, but perfectly fine for small fixes.
- rogerrogerr 1y ago> I just had to write 100+ architectural spec documents for 100+ different apps … whaaaaat?
- chermi 1y agoI'd interested to hear more about your workflow. I use Gemini for discussing the codebase, making ADR entries based on discussion, ticket generation, documenting the code like module descriptions and use cases+examples, and coming up with detailed plans for implementation that cursor with sonnet can implement. Do you have any particular formats, guidelines or prompts? I don't love my workflow. I try to keep everything in notion but it's becoming a pain. I'm pretty new to documentation and proper planning, but I feel like it's more important now to get the best use out of the llms. Any tips appreciated!
- sergiotapia 1y agoGemini 2.5 Pro replaced Claude 3.7 for me after using nothing but claude for a very long time. It's really fast, and really accurate. I can't wait to try Claude 4, it's always been the most "human" model in my opinion.
- ashirviskas 1y agoIdk I found Gemini 2.5 Breaking code style too often and introducing unneeded complexity on the top of leaving unfinished functions.
- Recursing 1y agoI also recommend trying out Gemini, I'm really impressed by the latest 2.5. Let's see if Claude 4 makes me switch back.
- rasulkireev 1y agoi was the same, but then slowly converted to Gemini. Still not sure how that happened tbh
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- cleak 1y agoSomething I’ve found true of Claude, but not other models, is that when the benchmarks are better, the real world performance is better. This makes me trust them a lot more and keeps me coming back.
- nico 1y agoI think it really depends on how you use it. Are you using an agent with it, or the chat directly? I've been pretty disappointed with Cursor and all the supported models. Sometimes it can be pretty good and convenient, because it's right there in the editor, but it can also get stuck on very dumb stuff and re-trying the same strategies over and over again I've had really good experiences with o4-high-mini directly on the chat. It's annoying going back and forth copying/pasting code between editor and the browser, but it also keeps me more in control about the actions and the context Would really like to know more about your experience
- qingcharles 1y agoI'm slutty. I tend to use all four at once: Claude, Grok, Gemini and OpenAI. They keep leap-frogging each other. My preference has been the output from Gemini these last few weeks. Going to check out Claude now.