7 ms·

Claude Code converted me from paying $0 for LLMs to $200 per month. Any co that wants a chance at getting that $200 ($300 is fine too) from me needs a Claude Co

Claude Code converted me from paying $0 for LLMs to $200 per month. Any co that wants a chance at getting that $200 ($300 is fine too) from me needs a Claude Code equivalent and a model where the equivalent's tools were part of its RL environment. I don't think I can go back to pasting code into a chat interface, no matter how great the model is.

joelthelion 1y ago
How does Claude code, trained to use its tools, compare to a model agnostic equivalentsuch as aider? Have you tried both?
- indigodaddy 1y ago
  There seems to be some love for opencode.ai https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44482504 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44482504
  - slowmovintarget 1y ago
    Just make sure it's that one [1] and not the one that's attempting to confuse people over the name [2]. [1]: https://github.com/sst/opencode https://github.com/sst/opencode [2]: https://x.com/thdxr/status/1933561254481666466 https://x.com/thdxr/status/1933561254481666466
- vessenes 1y ago
  I'm an extensive user of both. aider was the best a few months ago -- claude code is substantially more performant and easier to work with as a dev, regardless of aider's underlying model. Between claude code and gemini, you can really feel the difference in the tool training / implementation -- Anthropic's ahead of the game here in terms of integrating a suite of tools for claude to use. When I have a difficult problem or claude is spinning, I usually would use o3-pro, although today I threw something by Grok 4 and it was excellent, finding a subtle bug and provided some clear communication about a fix, and the fix. Anyway, I suggest you give them a go. But start with claude or gemini's CLI - right now, if you want a text UI for coding, they are the easiest to work with.
  - jswny 1y ago
    Have you tried the codex CLI? And how does it compare to those other CLI agents if so?
    - Karrot_Kream 1y ago
      The Codex CLI feels a lot more unpolished than the others. If you look at the repo's commit history, they're in the middle of a rewrite. The CLI often tries to involve calls on the Codex model using APIs that don't exist anymore. It's a mess. It is model agnostic however.
IAmNotACellist 1y ago
How does Claude Code at $200 compare to their basic one, at $20?
- franze 1y ago
  well i'm running claude code 24/7 on a server - instead of short coding sessions
  - oblio 1y ago
    Running on a server? As in, running it yourself?
    - darkwater 1y ago
      Maybe in the "infinite number of monkeys writing Shakespeare" way?
    - wellthisisgreat 1y ago
      I’d guess in a sense that it’s on full-auto most of the time with some minimal check-ins? I was wondering how far can you take TDD-based approach to have Claud continuously produce functional code
      - slowmovintarget 1y ago
        https://x.com/ylecun/status/1935108028891861393 https://x.com/ylecun/status/1935108028891861393 Error rate over time increases dramatically.
  - victorbjorklund 1y ago
    Can you describe what kind of stuff you do where it can go wild without supervision? I never managed to get to a state where agents code for more than 10 min without needing my input
    - unshavedyak 1y ago
vineyardmike 1y ago
I wasn’t a fan of the interface for Claude Code and Gemini CLI, and I much prefer the IDE-integrated Cursor or Copilot interfaces. That said, I agree that I’d gladly pay a ton extra for increased quota on my tools of choice because of increased productivity. But I agree, normal chat interfaces are not the future of coding with an LLM. I also agree that the RL environment including custom and intentional tool use will be super important going forward. The next best LLM (for coding) will be from the company with the best usage logs to train against. Training against tool use will be the next frontier for the year. That’s surely why GeminiCLI now exists, and why OpenAI bought windsurf and built out Codex.
handfuloflight 1y ago
I hear there's a Grok 4 model specialized for coding coming in the next few weeks.
- littlestymaar 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Iulioh 1y ago
    Only if you pay for a blue checkmark too
- apparent 1y ago
  I have been using Grok 4 via Cursor for a few hours and have found it is able to do some things that other models couldn't (and on the first try). That said, it also changed areas of the code I did not ask it to on a few occasions. Hopefully these issues will be cleaned up by the impending release.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
xdfgh1112 1y ago
You mean like the basic copilot that comes free with vs code?
pron 1y ago
I've yet to use an LLM for coding, so let me ask you a question. The other day I had to write some presumably boring serialization code, and I thought, hmm, I could probably describe the approach I want to take faster than writing the code, so it would be great if an LLM could generate it for me. But as I was coding I realised that while my approach was sound and achievable, it hit a non-trivial challenge that required a rather advanced solution. An inexperienced intern would have probably not been able to come up with the solution without further guidance, but they would have definitely noticed the problem, described it to me, and asked me what to do. Are we at a stage where an LLM (assuming it doesn't find the solution on its own, which is ok) would come back to me and say, listen, I've tried your approach but I've run into this particular difficulty, can you advise me what to do, or would it just write incorrect code that I would then have to carefully read and realise what the challenge is myself?
- raddan 1y ago
  I don’t know if a blanket answer is possible. I had the experience yesterday of asking for a simplification of a working (a computational geometry problem, to a first approximation) algorithm that I wrote. ChatGPT responded with what looked like a rather clever simplification that seemed to rely on some number theory hack I did not understand, so I asked it to explain it to me. It proceeded to demonstrate to itself that it was actually wrong, then it came up with two alternative algorithms that it also concluded were wrong, before deciding that my own algorithm was best. Then it proceeded to rewrite my program using the original flawed algorithm. I later worked out a simpler version myself, on paper. It was kind of a waste of time. I tend not to ask for solutions from whole cloth anymore. It’s much better at giving me small in-context examples of API use, or finding handy functions in libraries, or pointing out corner cases.
  - pjerem 1y ago
    You really can’t compare free "check my algorithm" ChatGPT with $200/month "generate a working product" Claude Code. I’m not saying Claude Code is perfect or is the panacea but those are really different products with orders of magnitude of difference in capabilities.
WXLCKNO 1y ago
Same for me. Except I'm never gonna give Elon money, I don't care how good his model is.
qingcharles 1y ago
I've been pasting code into Grok4 just to test it. I hate doing it that way, but the output on coding tasks has been exceptional. It told me to stop pasting code and that it can access GitHub, so tonight I'll try it on a public repo.
oc1 1y ago
Same. The moment anthropic covered claude code with their max subscription i switched over. I don't care about general ai and their chat interfaces. I need the best specialized battle-tested tools that proved to solve the problems i have and not some generic ai chat interface that tries to build me some half-baked script in a minute which i have to debug. I will pay 200€ for an end-user niche product like claude code that solves reliably my niche problems but i won't even pay 20€ for chatgpt or claude chat.
- yfontana 1y ago
  I pay for chatgpt because, in my experience, o3 and o4 are currently the best at combining reasoning with information retrieval from web searches. They're the best models I've tried at emulating the way I search for information (evaluating source quality, combining and contrasting information from several sources, refining searches, etc.), and using the results as part of a reasoning process. It's not necessarily significant for coding, but it is for designing.
beepbooptheory 1y ago
I know I'm cheap but that just really seems like so much money to spend.. This is pretty typical I guess? My Anthropic bill has never been more than $17 a month or so.

joelthelion 1y ago

How does Claude code, trained to use its tools, compare to a model agnostic equivalentsuch as aider? Have you tried both?

indigodaddy 1y ago
There seems to be some love for opencode.ai https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44482504 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44482504
- slowmovintarget 1y ago
  Just make sure it's that one [1] and not the one that's attempting to confuse people over the name [2]. [1]: https://github.com/sst/opencode https://github.com/sst/opencode [2]: https://x.com/thdxr/status/1933561254481666466 https://x.com/thdxr/status/1933561254481666466
vessenes 1y ago
I'm an extensive user of both. aider was the best a few months ago -- claude code is substantially more performant and easier to work with as a dev, regardless of aider's underlying model. Between claude code and gemini, you can really feel the difference in the tool training / implementation -- Anthropic's ahead of the game here in terms of integrating a suite of tools for claude to use. When I have a difficult problem or claude is spinning, I usually would use o3-pro, although today I threw something by Grok 4 and it was excellent, finding a subtle bug and provided some clear communication about a fix, and the fix. Anyway, I suggest you give them a go. But start with claude or gemini's CLI - right now, if you want a text UI for coding, they are the easiest to work with.
- jswny 1y ago
  Have you tried the codex CLI? And how does it compare to those other CLI agents if so?
  - Karrot_Kream 1y ago
    The Codex CLI feels a lot more unpolished than the others. If you look at the repo's commit history, they're in the middle of a rewrite. The CLI often tries to involve calls on the Codex model using APIs that don't exist anymore. It's a mess. It is model agnostic however.

IAmNotACellist 1y ago

How does Claude Code at $200 compare to their basic one, at $20?

franze 1y ago
well i'm running claude code 24/7 on a server - instead of short coding sessions
- oblio 1y ago
  Running on a server? As in, running it yourself?
  - darkwater 1y ago
    Maybe in the "infinite number of monkeys writing Shakespeare" way?
  - wellthisisgreat 1y ago
    I’d guess in a sense that it’s on full-auto most of the time with some minimal check-ins? I was wondering how far can you take TDD-based approach to have Claud continuously produce functional code
    - slowmovintarget 1y ago
      https://x.com/ylecun/status/1935108028891861393 https://x.com/ylecun/status/1935108028891861393 Error rate over time increases dramatically.
- victorbjorklund 1y ago
  Can you describe what kind of stuff you do where it can go wild without supervision? I never managed to get to a state where agents code for more than 10 min without needing my input
  - unshavedyak 1y ago

vineyardmike 1y ago

I wasn’t a fan of the interface for Claude Code and Gemini CLI, and I much prefer the IDE-integrated Cursor or Copilot interfaces. That said, I agree that I’d gladly pay a ton extra for increased quota on my tools of choice because of increased productivity. But I agree, normal chat interfaces are not the future of coding with an LLM. I also agree that the RL environment including custom and intentional tool use will be super important going forward. The next best LLM (for coding) will be from the company with the best usage logs to train against. Training against tool use will be the next frontier for the year. That’s surely why GeminiCLI now exists, and why OpenAI bought windsurf and built out Codex.

handfuloflight 1y ago

I hear there's a Grok 4 model specialized for coding coming in the next few weeks.

littlestymaar 1y ago
[flagged]
- Iulioh 1y ago
  Only if you pay for a blue checkmark too
apparent 1y ago
I have been using Grok 4 via Cursor for a few hours and have found it is able to do some things that other models couldn't (and on the first try). That said, it also changed areas of the code I did not ask it to on a few occasions. Hopefully these issues will be cleaned up by the impending release.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

xdfgh1112 1y ago

You mean like the basic copilot that comes free with vs code?

pron 1y ago

I've yet to use an LLM for coding, so let me ask you a question. The other day I had to write some presumably boring serialization code, and I thought, hmm, I could probably describe the approach I want to take faster than writing the code, so it would be great if an LLM could generate it for me. But as I was coding I realised that while my approach was sound and achievable, it hit a non-trivial challenge that required a rather advanced solution. An inexperienced intern would have probably not been able to come up with the solution without further guidance, but they would have definitely noticed the problem, described it to me, and asked me what to do. Are we at a stage where an LLM (assuming it doesn't find the solution on its own, which is ok) would come back to me and say, listen, I've tried your approach but I've run into this particular difficulty, can you advise me what to do, or would it just write incorrect code that I would then have to carefully read and realise what the challenge is myself?

raddan 1y ago
I don’t know if a blanket answer is possible. I had the experience yesterday of asking for a simplification of a working (a computational geometry problem, to a first approximation) algorithm that I wrote. ChatGPT responded with what looked like a rather clever simplification that seemed to rely on some number theory hack I did not understand, so I asked it to explain it to me. It proceeded to demonstrate to itself that it was actually wrong, then it came up with two alternative algorithms that it also concluded were wrong, before deciding that my own algorithm was best. Then it proceeded to rewrite my program using the original flawed algorithm. I later worked out a simpler version myself, on paper. It was kind of a waste of time. I tend not to ask for solutions from whole cloth anymore. It’s much better at giving me small in-context examples of API use, or finding handy functions in libraries, or pointing out corner cases.
- pjerem 1y ago
  You really can’t compare free "check my algorithm" ChatGPT with $200/month "generate a working product" Claude Code. I’m not saying Claude Code is perfect or is the panacea but those are really different products with orders of magnitude of difference in capabilities.

WXLCKNO 1y ago

Same for me. Except I'm never gonna give Elon money, I don't care how good his model is.

qingcharles 1y ago

I've been pasting code into Grok4 just to test it. I hate doing it that way, but the output on coding tasks has been exceptional. It told me to stop pasting code and that it can access GitHub, so tonight I'll try it on a public repo.

oc1 1y ago

Same. The moment anthropic covered claude code with their max subscription i switched over. I don't care about general ai and their chat interfaces. I need the best specialized battle-tested tools that proved to solve the problems i have and not some generic ai chat interface that tries to build me some half-baked script in a minute which i have to debug. I will pay 200€ for an end-user niche product like claude code that solves reliably my niche problems but i won't even pay 20€ for chatgpt or claude chat.

yfontana 1y ago
I pay for chatgpt because, in my experience, o3 and o4 are currently the best at combining reasoning with information retrieval from web searches. They're the best models I've tried at emulating the way I search for information (evaluating source quality, combining and contrasting information from several sources, refining searches, etc.), and using the results as part of a reasoning process. It's not necessarily significant for coding, but it is for designing.

beepbooptheory 1y ago

I know I'm cheap but that just really seems like so much money to spend.. This is pretty typical I guess? My Anthropic bill has never been more than $17 a month or so.