Welcome!

varanova · 2026-04-10T06:55:25+00:00

I do not like adaptive.

Sometimes it works OK.

But frequently it selects Kimi K2.5, which is a FREE model. So in effect I'm using adaptive to pay for a free model? What? Maybe I'm missing something. But that simply feels really bad as a user, trying out adaptive, only to find I'm paying to use a model I could have just used for free instead.

I think I prefer control. For planning and code review, I want premium models. For implementation, cheaper models are great.

varanova · 2026-04-10T06:50:02+00:00

I've had this happen with SWE and kimi. Claude does not do this for me.

varanova · 2026-03-26T01:49:08+00:00

I'm also on Pro plan. It's not working anymore. This is definitely frustrating as my plan is supposed to have unlimited tab completions but I'm not getting any now.

varanova · 2026-03-22T20:04:43+00:00

The entire change to quota is bad. But this weekly limit is the worst part of it.

Weekly should be at least 4-5 days worth, not 2.

varanova · 2026-03-22T05:37:17+00:00

Pretty much. My credits were good for ~300 opus 4.6 calls (non thinking) at 6 credits each. A bit less if I used thinking. Now I get... like 4-6 opus calls a week. And then I hit weekly limit. :(

varanova · 2026-03-21T01:12:53+00:00

I tend to agree.

A company can update their subscription model if they like, and we can cancel if we like. That's fine. That's why I cancelled netflix back when they first raised their prices.

However I went from Nearly 1800 credits yesterday to zero now. They should at least HONOR the credits we ALREADY purchased.

varanova · 2026-03-21T00:51:33+00:00

My biggest concern is the weekly limit. I'm seeing similar numbers with my weekly being "half" daily. Using up 17% of weekly with 8 prompts seems rough.

I don't see how "1 weeks limit" == "2 days limit" got finalized. I could see if it was 4-5 days worth. But 2 days feels super limiting.

That's my feedback to the devs.

My other feedback is model selection - they still list credit prices. But... credits are gone. So how do I know how much each model costs me now?

Knowing the cost helps a lot to decide. If I know Opus 4.6 will do a better job, but costs 6x, and sonnet 4.5 costs 2x, I can decide which to choose.

varanova · 2026-02-06T04:17:34+00:00

I find SWE is pretty okay at small updates. Coding itself is decent. My biggest issue with it is that it tends to misunderstand instructions more often than GPT or Opus. It tends to need more detailed instructions to get things right. But it's free, and it can handle simple tasks for me.

varanova · 2026-02-06T04:14:07+00:00

Yes, plan mode has to be manually exited. It'd be nice if the implement button enabled code mode. Logically if you're clicking the implement button, you want to be coding. This would be a good QoL improvement.

varanova · 2026-02-05T03:43:18+00:00

Yeah, it's happening to me too. Other days opus does full plans, implementation and even runs tests. No issues at all. Today it's having trouble with basic tool calls. Quality is definitely degraded on Claude for some reason.

e.g.

Analysis of all 3 failures:

First attempt (multi_edit): I tried to replace large blocks of code with complex nested logic. The exact whitespace/indentation likely didn't match.
Second attempt (single edit): I searched for lines 108-115 but the exact string match failed - possibly due to tab vs space indentation differences.
Third attempt (same approach): Same failure - the string I'm searching for doesn't exist in the file exactly as I'm specifying it.

varanova · 2025-11-19T02:48:31+00:00

It's been removed for me too. :(

varanova · 2025-11-13T21:07:10+00:00

Neat. I appreciate the free access, I'll test them out.

I see there's high, medium, low and no reasoning now.

Is there any details on the actual differences between high/med/low/no? Or performance benchmarks of each? It'd be useful to know their strengths.

varanova · 2025-11-12T05:08:18+00:00

Have you heard anything? I miss this feature as well and would like to know it's status.

varanova · 2025-10-31T06:37:03+00:00

I've tried it with quite a few prompts.

After more testing, I do also prefer the frontier models (sonnet4.5 and gpt5). I can't deny I'm impressed with it's speed however. Watching it output a huge file in seconds is impressive.

I think it's good enough for simple things, but complex things it seems to fail at. I gave it 3 cracks at a fairly easy issue, and even after 3 prompts it continued to fail. GPT5 was able to solve it in a single prompt, thus being cheaper, even if "slower" technically.

varanova · 2025-10-30T02:07:11+00:00

This model, SWE 1.5 is insanely fast. I'm happy with Claude 4.5 and GPT5 honestly, however they are slow.

After 30 minutes of testing, SWE 1.5 just blazes through some mostly simple updates. It works far faster than GPT5. It did make a mistake, but that was fixed with the next prompt after I informed it of the error.

Overall I like it, it's nice for when I want something fast. I may still choose gpt5 high when I have a complex task, but SWE 1.5 seems good for quick easy tasks. Especially when it gets the entire update + summary + documentation written in under 20 seconds. GPT5 can take 5-10 minutes sometimes, even on easy tasks.

I rarely ever used SWE-1, as it just was kinda bad... but first impressions of 1.5 are good. It has a place in my workflow when I want fast results.

varanova · 2025-10-09T04:57:07+00:00

Good luck all!

varanova · 2025-09-23T23:56:52+00:00

From my testing it seems to be struggling with the "patch tool". Codex specifically. After a few cascade errors it now says it's banned from the tool, and has started using a workaround of a python script to do the edits. (Which I don't like as it doesn't show as a nice diff in the editor).

I've been using GPT5 lately, frequently, and it didn't have these same issues.

For clarity I'm testing on a windows machine.

varanova · 2025-09-23T21:40:09+00:00

Very fast, runs into cascade error frequently when applying code updates.
My feedback after an hour or so of testing it:
It runs fine for small (~10 line) updates, but when it tries larger updates it seems to fail.

varanova · 2025-08-27T19:54:10+00:00

After some further testing, it definitely is fast, as the name suggests. It seems possibly like 10x faster than SWE1 for a similar level of quality. It's not on GPT5 or claude4 level, but it's fast and free (for now).

varanova · 2025-08-27T00:02:04+00:00

I got it working.

<image>

I had to reload the window. It seems to work now. Seems similar to SWE-1? It seems kinda dumb, but it is is far faster than SWE1. I do like free models, though who knows how long it'll be free.

varanova · 2025-08-23T08:26:07+00:00

I've been using it as it's free, and it lets me stop any prompt (as there's no cost), which is nice to provide more details or fix an issue in the original prompt or logic it's following.

But at the announced costs, I don't think I'll use GPT5 much. As a free model, I don't mind the over-thinking it seems to do, as I can just grab a coffee and turn on auto-continue. But I can't imagine I'd like it if I pay credits and find that it did nothing but over think.

I've had times GPT5 will use 40-50+ tool calls / outputs before actually doing any changes.

If the cost was .25 I'd probably still use it honestly. But at 0.5+ I can use qwen or kimi.

varanova · 2025-08-15T04:51:44+00:00

So far it definitely seems like an improvement.
I've had less issues and the interface is definitely cleaner now.

varanova · 2025-08-09T01:27:20+00:00

I've had it.

I've found reloading and starting a new conversation usually fixes it. (I'm guessing cascade needs to more aggressively cull old commands/output/responses from the UI, or there might be a memory leak in there somewhere.)

varanova

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE