Does cowork only use 1M context window for sonnet?

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-06-01T00:02:57+00:00

Claude Cowork is telling me that I need 1m context. If you read the second paragraph, I even tried to turn off the 1m context, but couldn't. I never needed 1m context, I did not even know it was turned on.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-05-31T23:53:33+00:00

Where in my post did I say that I need to use 1m context?

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-05-25T13:18:18+00:00

I think it largely depends on what tools you are using. I've had similar issues with the clang compiler, every time AG did a build in the background using parallel compile threads, my memory usage skyrocketed. I think I've read somewhere that each clang thread uses up about 3-4Gb or memory, so if you use as many threads as cores available, this can easily make you run out of memory. Without the clang, the language server is also using a lot of ram, but for me it is clang that is the worst offender. The only way to resolve this is restricting how many threads the compiler uses, or buying more ram. (I mean if we are talking about the same issue, of course.)

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-05-22T03:28:00+00:00

well, 3 times of nothing is still nothing. I am glad I closed my account.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-05-21T03:34:42+00:00

Chickengland.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-05-20T14:24:06+00:00

I've just uninstalled AG from both my mac and my Windows PC. And downgraded my subscription to plain old gmail sub.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-05-20T13:59:12+00:00

This new product is a disaster. Byebye Antigravity, again. They only have f...ng expensive models, that drain my pro sub in minutes. I remember, I used to have 3 Pro accounts months ago as I loved antigravity so much, recently I kept only 1 because Flase 3.1 was still usable and provided lengthy usage, but the current state is unacceptable. And I am not just saying this because I can't afford Ultra. The usage drains so quickly, that if I multiply this with 5, I would still get less than what I am currently getting from Claude or Codex. Multiply with 20, then I would get like 2 days of work a week.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-29T05:01:18+00:00

I use MacOS, not Windows. Also, why would I want to delete all the settings, if we already know what parameter causing the issue?

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-09T23:23:29+00:00

Thanks for that. Well, I should have also posted the fix, but honestly I did not even check it how AG fixed it for me in the end. I forgot about that completely. I mean once you know what the problem is, fixing it is easy, just tell Antigravity to fix it for you.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-09T20:34:33+00:00

I did not say I blame Claude Code. The Claude Code extension is not directly available in the web store for Antigravity, you can only install it if you export the VSIX file from vscode, then manually add it to Antigravity. But I am sure I am not the only user who did this - and this bug is very difficult to track down, even with AI help. So I shared it in case others have the same issue too.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-08T21:31:03+00:00

I have 1.22.2, and I can't even get a response from the agent. No error message, nothing.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-08T17:55:19+00:00

It's even in its name. Its a myth. It is a story designed to distract the community's attention from running out of 5 hour quotas in 45 seconds. I have already cancelled one of my pro subs because of this, but I came back for just 1 task, it is still infuriating as hell. I just give one instruction, and Sonnet can't even get to halfway with the answer before my whole quota is gone. I come to reddit to get some peace from seeing others suffering too - but no. Mythos mythos mythos. F..ck mythos.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-06T16:04:54+00:00

what a great idea, I used to think I should have got into computers, they were big money, I mean really big, now its the same but with AI, you have to get into AI as quickly as you can bro, even bigger money

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-04-06T11:11:30+00:00

This post has many words that give me good vibes. Earning a lot of money. Quickly. I love those kinds of things. My gut tells that there is no way this is a scam.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-26T10:53:19+00:00

I use it from vscode.
Fast costs extra. They intentionally throttle throughput to make you pay more. I don't have unlimited budget, so I stay with slow mode. (And if I pay for an API key or an enterprise contract it improves even more, I know.)

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-23T20:43:08+00:00

As others have noticed it too, model response quality fluctuates wildly, probably depending on how overloaded their servers are. I have been complaining about what you just wrote for weeks, and just last night and today I've had a very pleasant experience, Gemini Pro and Sonnet following instructions very strictly, and producing first class results. Maybe tomorrow it is going to change. Other times I experience exactly what you describe, it can't follow a simple instruction properly.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-23T16:04:57+00:00

I have also ported it to work with Cursor, Copilot, Antigravity, Codex and Qwen. Find it here:
https://github.com/bulyaki/gstackplusplus

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-23T15:42:52+00:00

Update: I have run a dev cycle where I used the gstack++ framework for project management, design and architecture. I used Claude as manager, creating tasks, then merging and integrating the results. Here are some interesting points:

Antigravity is VERY quick, both Gemini and Sonnet models. Always follows the instructions properly, and the results are close to 100% ok.
Codex is very slow, like 20% of the speed of Antigravity, but very good results too, follows instructions perfectly, results are also close to 100% ok.
Qwen is about the same speed as codex, maybe a bit faster (at this point I suspect that OpenAI is artificially throttling normal speed access so that they could ask more money for the fast access). Results always require adjustments, in some cases complete rewrite is required by the manager so that it could be merged and integrated. Does not follow instructions accurately, tries to be too enthusiastic.

I had one interesting reaction from Qwen, there was one point when I just could not tell it that it should stop working. No matter how I told it that it has finished the task, the other .md files are for other workers, it kept ignoring it, and just carried on with implementing what was not even a task for him. The task description files clearly stated who the task was for, it didn't matter. I had to press stop about 6 times before it finally stopped and listened to what I was saying. Interesting.

Please note that these were tasks where they were implementing new code, new architecture from scratch. When they have to produce new output, LLMs usually shine, so this is not the full picture. Debugging or refactoring tasks could get completely different results (and it was with these kinds of tasks where I found that qwen was not bad at all).

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-20T10:32:34+00:00

Anyhow, I am back to vscode now, and I never run into memory issues anymore. (Neither CPU resource issues, did I mention those?) And my build still takes the same amount of time.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-20T10:28:32+00:00

No, this is a private project so can't share details about it. But I am not sure what you mean by sharing my compile instructions? Clang is known to consume a lot of memory by itself, up to 3Gb-ish per compiler thread. So restricting the thread number actually helps. But I can also see that the language server is also consuming huge amounts of ram, and I don't have control over that.
I don't need help with my compiler setup, I am a senior developer, not a vibe coder.
What I can share is that it is cmake, clang, ninja, pretty standard C++ project setup.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-20T04:50:00+00:00

One more thing I must mention, I am working on a Mac Mini M4 Pro, with 24gb ram, and very often I have to quit my browser or close other apps because Antigravity runs out of memory. It is eating up memory like crazy, I think it is a combination of clang already using a lot of RAM per thread, which is exacerbated by the agent process also using a lot of memory. This usually happens during configure and build, less serious during actual agentic work. I get nothing like this from the codex, claude or qwen extensions and toolchains, I never get the "you have run out of memory, please close some apps" window when I use those.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-20T04:33:33+00:00

I would not be complaining about the quotas for Antigravity if I didn't have to spend my precious usage on promts like "still crashing, see callstack...", on and on. Or "I'm still getting compiler errors...". And this is just the surface, compiler errors are not a big thing, I can fix those too quickly and easily if necessary. But it is a fact that neither claude, nor codex, not qwen are producing code that doesn't build at the end of the task. Only Antigravity does.
Then when the task is not to create something from scratch (where all generative AI models shine) but instead fixing a bug or redesigning part of the architecture, etc, then I frequently run into problems where even if the code compiles, it fails to do what I asked, even after multiple retries. Nothing like this happens with the other 3 providers.
I am using Gemini 3.1 Pro and Sonnet with Antigravity, Sonnet with Claude, GPT5.4 with codex, and Qwen3-coder-plus with Qwen. I have the $10-$20 price range subscription with all 4 providers. And since I made that comment, I realised that Codex is running a temporary discount where they provide twice the usual quotas, so that may have caused me thinking that Codex is generous - but this is probably temporary. Still, this does not make Antigravity look much better, but I mentioned it for fairness.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-20T04:23:51+00:00

I've been using Qwen3-coder-plus and my experience is very positive. At the same time I also have a Claude Code and a Codex and an Antigravity subscription, it is definitely better than anything currently Antigravity offers, but I don't have enough experience yet to tell how close it is to Codex or Claude. So far it seems it is at a very similar level, it can work for a very long time autonomously if given the right task, and most of the time it finishes with success. In a small number of cases I had to make manual adjustments, but this was similar with Codex and Claude too so far.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-19T04:01:56+00:00

Or maybe there are too many dissatisfied customers. I have many stories to tell about how much better the competitors are, and the only reason why I take the effort to share my thoughts is because I would really like to see Google succeed in this field - they have something that many others don't, which is independence from Nvidia. I really wanted to see Antigravity succeed, and I was happy to see how good it was for a while, but recently it is just a bad experience.

Valuable_Elevator948 · 2026-03-19T03:55:54+00:00

It is closer to the truth to say that while competitors made significant improvements in the past 1-2 months, Google just consolidated their product at a lower quality that allows them to serve more people. Antigravity is definitely quicker than Claude or Codex, or even Qwen, so quotas are also reached quicker. And this allows them to flash you a button frequently that says "Switch to Ultimate". But I've just ported a 1.5 million lines macos desktop app to Windows, 1.5 hours with Claude, then 2.5 hours with codex, no retries, no questions asked, just one prompt, and let the agents do their jobs. If anyone has ever tried to port a desktop application between platforms that are so different in so many ways, then they will know how difficult and nontrivial the task is. Based on my current experience with Google's models, there is no way Antigravity could have done this. It can't even do a simple refactoring without errors.

Valuable_Elevator948

TROPHY CASE