How much would you really be willing to spend (more) to keep it going with Claude should Anthropic go berserk with the rates, or put differently, how valuable is it to you now in monthly $$$ per person terms?
The poll/question is addressed only to the people who actually use Claude Code (so we don’t water down the stats).
After trying it out for few week wouldn’t pay for it at all.
They lock you in behind proprietary coding harness and don’t give you option to use your own with their models.
Pi + gpt5.5 is better experience in every aspect, at least for me. Harness is better, if you miss any feature you just prompt the model to implement it as extension to Pi. Gpt5.5 feels like more solid model than opus ATM
I also don’t feel like discussion about clankers is ever very productive as it is very subjective. In the same manner as I wouldn’t pay for Claude I would never spend money on hardware from Apple and going into that discussion feels like same type of flame war waste of time but looks like I am starting it anyway 
Yes, but theirs is a very efficient one.
Agreed, which is why I spend it on Dell & HP 
Depends how you define efficiency, if it is by token consumption it is very inefficient one.
Fixed monthly subscription here (Max). Never got even close to the 5h session limit. Never cross 50% of the weeklies either.
What seems to be the problem?
I know this is bit off track however the subject was raised and is related to using Claude.
Use Codex from inside Claude Code for code reviews or to delegate tasks to Codex.
This plugin is for Claude Code users who want an easy way to start using Codex from the workflow they already have.
I have no experience with the plugin, still waiting for a new project that could benefit where I can bring it clean.
I have burned through 5h session limit on 20$ plan in 2 prompts (20 min), max(x5) in 2h.
This was some time ago (few weeks) and maybe it is better now but that was enough to just cancel my subscription.
Re max subscription: I don’t see how outside running parallel sessions.
Not trying to change your mind, I fully understand. Just providing some addtional feedback.
That pain point is never binary, and it is never static.
Both Anthropic and OpenAI have recently increased quota limits for some paid tiers. For example, I use Claude on the Pro plan with the 5x usage option. With the recent increase, I am no longer hitting the weekly limit, although I can still use more than 50% of the hourly quota on a single “Plan mode” when using the highest model with thinking and effort turned up.
I have also found that tasks I could not realistically do years ago became possible several months ago on the highest-level models. Now, with a good plan in place, I can do much of the grunt coding work on lower-tier models as well.
I don’t want to give Anthropic any ideas here…
I’m at the 20x Max plan and I usually spend it all every week. However I rarely then use the API with the extra costs to continue, so Anthropic can take that as a sign that somewhere in between there I would switch.
Well anything below max effort or chatgpt xhigh produces code of a quality that make me want to punch my monitor and be done for the day when I see it. It is also not uncommon that I for some tasks I spend 10+ prompts planning stuff, where I ask it to go through known good codebase and basically make itself a task specific skill.
Otherwise whatever it produces is so far from what I would consider production code ready. Using it for toy experimental projects is fun but at some point I have actual work that I want to be done and if I have to babysit it through every 50 lines of code where it takes off in wrong direction it is just easier to write it on my own.
Where I actually find it useful is going through the codebases and summarizing it for me which doesn’t justify frontier model at all as it can be done by local model in similar capacity.
That being said I also burn through openAI 200$ plan every week and they are way more generous than Anthropic
Are you reviewing the code or just let fly whatever it produces? If you’re reviewing and not running parallel sessions, I can’t imagine how you manage to hit that limit.
Weird. Wouldn’t say it differs much from the way I use it, except for maybe the time I spend on reviewing the code (which is substantial).
I no longer pay for Claude — it’s too expensive. GLM from Z.ai is good enough for me and much cheaper than Claude/GPT/Gemini. To save even more money, I usually add “Don’t explain, just update the source and summarize” to the rules/system prompt. That way, I can use LLMs all day for only $10–20.
I’m not the person you are replying to, but just to note that I got close to my 20x limit for the first time last week when writing code generation in Elm: in other words Elm code that writes Elm code.
As I got to that last 10% of code generation, I had to develop a bunch of techniques to stop Claude from taking shortcuts, with one Claude Code instance commissioning and signing off on another’s work.
I’ve never been warned about being close to my limit when writing Elixir. But maybe I’m controlling context well by using private Hex packages to control the versioning of the layers of code in my stack.
Generally I agree that those limits are never hit for me in the past 12 months in normal usage where I’m reviewing Claude’s work, since I’m in a conversation and getting new ideas as we pair program.
I have two long running projects of which at least one pretty much always works. Data intensive so they take time but are not always heavy on tokens. Certain prompts can take 6 to 12 hours even on a rather decent computer. These are the paying ones so I do follow them very carefully, and also do test runs up ahead before the main branch. Those optimizations and explorations following many branches can take a lot of tokens.
As for the rest that varies. Some are play projects to learn while some are connected to Archdo or the skills. (I’ve put out about 8-9 skills or so publically, but we have closer to 40 internally and there is always something to improve on).
Then there are potential future projects which I probe around, and of course old pet projects which suddenly became easy to do.
Long term my aim is indeed to get good code straight out from LLMs, but not quite there yet. It is getting closer though.
Edit: And yes, I do have parallel sessions. Some are always on standby in their own terminals, while up to three are actively running.
Less than $100. And I use Claude Code on a daily basis.
Considering the quality difference between Anthropic and OpenAI models, I would rather build on a platform that allows me to use their service how I see fit (i.e. in other harnesses) without having to pay the massively-more-expensive API pricing (currently ~70x more after Anthropic increased usage limits after their deal with xAI). Not by constraining me to using their subpar TUI that breaks every other week (the skills autocompletion UI broke for me in a new release, within the past week).
Conversationally, I love Opus (still on 4.6). I just wish I could use it with a decent harness.
Dollar for dollar, I get much more mileage out of an OpenAI subscription than I do by using Claude.
'nuff said. I concede.
what is it that you don’t like about Claude Code’s harness? Me, I’m totally happy with it.
Seeing that you are working on a GUI framework, where the LLM has no closed (or at least tight enough) feedback loop, your stance is very understandable – and normal, I’ve heard it from multiple other people doing GUI work.
When you can give Claude a good test harness and a near-perfect requirements list / acceptance criteria, it does mostly well.
Sadly the more autonomous sessions leave Claude vulnerable to “this broke but it’s fine because…” or “this does not look good but it’s here before us so I am leaving it” or “I don’t like this but it’s out of scope” (for problems that almost human dev would immediately claim are in scope).
It’s not perfect. I am still hesitant to try GPT 5.5 but likely will; having two LLMs and one of them at least doing adversarial / critical reviews is by itself quite valuable.
© Copyright Elixir Forum | Terms | Privacy & Cookies
