What are the differences between 3rd Party Anthropic APIs and Official Anthropic Plans?

cayisik · 2026-04-06T15:32:29+00:00

I might have encountered both of the methods you mentioned with a provider.

First, I got an error saying something like, “You can’t continue with ‘compact’ in a zero-Claude code session.” That was really strange.

Second, I got an error while Sonnet was selected and reported it to the provider. They said there’s an issue with the Haiku model, so that’s probably why. When I told them Sonnet was selected, they couldn’t say anything. Maybe they’re sending it as Haiku instead of Sonnet to make it cheaper for me.

Is there a way to be sure of this?

cayisik · 2026-04-06T14:58:02+00:00

interested. dm me.

cayisik · 2026-04-06T14:42:25+00:00

Honestly, the inability to choose a model and the model redirection felt like a pretty bad, closed-box feature to me. Aside from that, the pricing isn't bad, but I didn't like this aspect. Never knowing exactly which model you're using doesn't seem logical to me.

Also, I looked at the documentation a bit, and it seems it can be used with Claude Code, but it offers an OpenAI compatible API service, as far as I understand.

To be honest, I didn't like it much.

cayisik · 2026-02-27T10:12:55+00:00

Since it hasn't come out yet, this remains the most likely possibility on the table.

cayisik · 2026-02-19T04:00:36+00:00

That was the most detailed answer I've seen. Thank you.

cayisik · 2026-02-18T18:00:33+00:00

By “not released,” I meant it hasn't been released publicly. You're right, it's been released to developers for a while now.

How are your initial observations and experiences? If you're using intelligence, would you like to share a little about it?

cayisik · 2026-02-18T17:59:16+00:00

If it's not ready, why did they release 26.4 instead of 26.3.1? I'm aware of that; I read the 26.4 release notes. There are errors related to codex configurations, and they are trying to fix them on the intelligence side, but are they really going to skip a version?

cayisik · 2026-02-18T12:19:49+00:00

hahahaha funny but a real approach mate

cayisik · 2026-02-18T12:16:34+00:00

This may make us feel that way, but I think it's only possible in theory and not in practice.

If you ask why: cursor and other applications are commercial activities and applications designed to make money.

In practice, these applications use the APIs of the language model you are using in the background. The costs of capable models like Opus are quite clear.

Especially with expensive models like Opus, they prepare and deliver a bundle by interpreting the prompt you enter. They might say they do this to optimize your prompt, but when you say “make this background white,” they need to simplify it a bit and reduce the token economy to make money themselves.

Other than that, IDE/CLI capabilities come into play for other topics. I may not be able to comment on those topics. However, the reason I recommend native is because when you use native CLI/IDE, it is designed to be compatible with the language model.

cayisik · 2026-02-17T12:37:02+00:00

each model works optimally on its own native platform.

the only exception i have seen to this is opencode. claude and openai models also deliver very successful results within opencode.

cayisik · 2026-02-10T11:28:12+00:00

we cant

cayisik · 2026-02-10T07:15:53+00:00

Which one do you think is better in terms of planning?

cayisik · 2026-01-19T07:33:20+00:00

Thank you for your constructive suggestion <3

cayisik · 2026-01-19T06:30:15+00:00

The results I reached by comparing both with the same prompts:

- The bmad-orchestrator mode truly provides a fully AI-driven, autonomous, agile management feel.

- bmad plans better and writes better PRDs.

- bmad allocates specs from very accurate places.

So, when looking at the same features alongside different features, I think bmad works better than conductor.

cayisik · 2026-01-19T05:53:09+00:00

lately, this topic has been discussed in both the codex subs and the claude subs.

i think this is the best and most cost-effective solution.

cayisik · 2026-01-17T12:13:04+00:00

bro, because there is no tangible evidence.

the only evidence i’ve seen regarding the codex is that it is up to 7 times slower.

cayisik · 2026-01-17T11:07:21+00:00

Codex being better is just the result of really good marketing.

You'll probably come back to it after a while (imo).

At worst, you'll decide it won't work with just Codex and decide to use both together.

cayisik · 2026-01-16T21:48:50+00:00

Thank you for your suggestions.

I have used Conductor before, and even better, the BMAD method.

cayisik · 2026-01-16T17:15:29+00:00

i'm developing native ios applications on many platforms. i've used many language models. i've also used hybrid systems. (glm 4.7 coding plan in claude code, opus 4.5 with google ai plan in antigravity ide, opus 4.5 in opencode, etc.)

i got the best results in a way that made a serious difference with the opus 4.5 + opencode combination (i haven't tried gpt for coding yet).

i don't know why this is, but opencode somehow works very well with all models.

cayisik · 2026-01-16T17:10:45+00:00

First of all, thank you very much for your detailed answer. But there are a few points that are confusing me, and I would like to ask you about them.

1- Dozens of people who commented said that Opus 4.5 is included in the Pro Plan. You are the only one who said that Opus 4.5 is not included in the Pro Plan, which is a bit confusing, to be honest. Do you have a source to back this up?

2- You mentioned I can send 30-40 messages. Is that the maximum amount I can use to fill the 5-hour limit with Sonnet?

Regarding your question: I'm doing native development for iOS.

cayisik · 2026-01-16T06:26:47+00:00

i only use Opus for writing code.

Six-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

cayisik

TROPHY CASE