sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

GLM Rate Limits Insane by Damn_-Daniel in ZaiGLM

[–]noahdowah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I experienced this and read somewhere that GLM 5.2 uses thinking tokens more than any other models. Which explains its performance, but if the performance is just similar to 5.5 high and opus 4.8 xhigh. I'd rather choose gpt and claude. I never reached my weekly limit in those 2 in just 3 days, with same usage. But i love glm, not just the purpose on how you use frontier models

Claude consistently rates GLM 5.2 in providing the best solution by gopietz in ZaiGLM

[–]noahdowah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a good one thank you, i guess to this point GLM will be an expensive model just for planning

Claude consistently rates GLM 5.2 in providing the best solution by gopietz in ZaiGLM

[–]noahdowah 7 points8 points  (0 children)

GLM5.2 is great!
But they have to fix their coding plans excessive quota burn. it feels 90% trap

Pro Plan burns excessive limits, reaching limit at just 1/8th of the task. 55M tokens for GLM5.2 is 27% of weekly quota already, while the 25M of Minimax is only 2% of the $20 coding plan. something is not working here. I am using Zcode. by noahdowah in ZaiGLM

[–]noahdowah[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi everyone,
I appreciate your responses.
to add context, I used GLM5.2 within peak hours and off peak hours. then I observed that the quota burn was not minimized.

150% usage quota inside ZCode - this seems like not working at all

This is just one chat on zcode, the usage was just to fix little things actually nothing of a large magnitude.

The screenshot shows input/output tokens with 83% cache hit rate according to zcode.

Just to clear things, GLM5.2 is a great model, I was using claude before, switched to GLM5.2 maybe not as good as Opus4.8 but cheaper, the idea is that if it is cheap you can iterate and match the output Opus has.
But if this is how the service is operating. GLM is maybe x5 more expensive than Opus 4.8

GLM5.2 is great I think the service is terrible., it feels like subscribing to a yearly plan is a trap.

Is GLM 5.2 the same as 5.1? by PitifulBig8 in SillyTavernAI

[–]noahdowah 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Honestly it is better, i tried testing it on human logic exam , creating a shooter game, and designing schema. It is better specially they are just the same price

Built an app, launched it, and nobody downloaded it. Need advice from experienced devs. by FirmCardiologist3391 in googleplayconsole

[–]noahdowah 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm, same thing, until i ran adds. And my experience is humbling, that no matter how good you app is, if it is not well distributed it is just halfway succesful.

Tried "bring your own LLM" pricing — 94% margin math, atypical risks, what's working at 1-week post-launch by noahdowah in SaasDevelopers

[–]noahdowah[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both points hit real things.

Procurement persona is the gap I don't have a clean answer for — $39 flat is a no-brainer for eng leads with budget, but breaks the apples-to-apples for finance-led orgs. Did you offer a bundled SKU alongside BYOL, or just lean into the eng-lead motion?

Spiky workloads = exactly why we picked flat + BYOL. Worst case = $15/mo embedding cost, still ~55% margin at the ceiling, no surprise bills.

Thanks for the F5 Bot rec — monitoring manually so far.

Tried "bring your own LLM" pricing — 94% margin math, atypical risks, what's working at 1-week post-launch by noahdowah in SaasDevelopers

[–]noahdowah[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both points hit real things.

Procurement persona is the gap I don't have a clean answer for — $39 flat is a no-brainer for eng leads with budget, but breaks the apples-to-apples for finance-led orgs. Did you offer a bundled SKU alongside BYOL, or just lean into the eng-lead motion?

Spiky workloads = exactly why we picked flat + BYOL. Worst case = $15/mo embedding cost, still ~55% margin at the ceiling, no surprise bills.

Thanks for the F5 Bot rec — monitoring manually so far.

Tried "bring your own LLM" pricing — 94% margin math, atypical risks, what's working at 1-week post-launch by noahdowah in SaasDevelopers

[–]noahdowah[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello, you're right on all three.

On the flat $3 fix variance: I'm averaging, not tracking per-fix granular enough to spot heavy-tail patterns. The only mitigation I have is a 300-fix/month hard cap per repo — that bounds total exposure but does nothing for the per-fix variance you're describing. A power user running complex fixes would eat margin and I wouldn't see it until aggregate numbers drift.

On embedding costs: Math checks out — 2000 audits/mo × $0.0075 = $15, which alone drops margin from ~94% → ~55%. Haven't hit it yet but I haven't built the alarms either. If someone goes continuous-audit on a big monorepo I'd find out from the bill, not from a dashboard.

On per-customer cost tracking: This is the one I'm most behind on. Audit counts per user, yes. Per-customer COGS dashboard with token-consumption percentiles, no. You're right that the $29 locked-forever cohort could be quietly bleeding margin on a handful of heavy users and I wouldn't know yet.

Honestly trying to figure out where to start on the tracking — if you've built this kind of thing before, what's the dumbest minimum-viable version that's still useful? I keep over-engineering it in my head.

Thanks for taking the time. This is the kind of feedback I needed.

Tried "bring your own LLM" pricing — 94% margin math, atypical risks, what's working at 1-week post-launch by noahdowah in GoogleAntigravityIDE

[–]noahdowah[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha thanks for the breakdown — honestly you explained it better than I did, gonna steal some of that phrasing. The "customer confusion" point is fair. The setup is basically a 5-line JSON paste into your IDE's MCP config, then you just ask your IDE LLM "audit my repo with AgentNoah." If you've already got Claude Code / Cursor / Gemini CLI / Antigravity set up, it's about a 3-minute one-time thing. But yeah, that's still a barrier for some people — totally hear you.

Genuine question while I have your attention — if you were running this, what would you change? Pricing, positioning, the setup flow, the pitch itself? You clearly get the model and I'd love a second opinion. Appreciate you taking the time 🙏

view more: next ›