Cursor, since Grok 4.5, has had an incredible deal for frontier level models, their subscription now goes way further than OpenAI or Anthropic. Even on their lower tier plans you can use a lot tokens on their of their first party models (Grok and Composer) and not really run out comparatively. Combine them with an orchestrator and implementor type setup and it goes even further.
Can you explain what you mean? These days courtesy of an addictive reset game OpenAI is playing, I can't find anything with frontier intelligence that's more cost efficient...
If they didn’t constantly reset, they’d be about the same as Anthropic.
Right now, I find that Grok offers better value, uses fewer tokens per turn, and makes better code. I haven’t tried Cursor because I don’t want to change editors again, but maybe I should try it…
Not that I know of. AA's token use metrics (mentioned in this article) are indicative, however. They say explicitly here that the Grok models are notably token efficient. This is my experience.
Yeah, even without the resets, chatgpt subscription currently goes quite a bit further than an equivalent anthropic plan. The main reason to have an anthropic plan is to get access to Fable 5 if you feel the quality of output makes it worth it.
The benchmark article we're replying to shows that Grok token usage is at least on par with the latest OpenAI models [1], and significantly cheaper per token:
I believe they are the only western provider that has Kimi K3 on a subscription plan today as well. I would love to ditch Anthropic and be on Kimi if there were a subsidized plan like that with ZDR
They don't do request based pricing anymore. Its just token based (1 credit = $0.01) plus some bonus credit based on which plan you subscribe. So for example a $39 plan get $70 of credits.
Yeah, I know, but "credit" translates differently because the models bill at different rates, which gets turned into "multipliers" (or at least, it did).
Have they converted entirely to transparent API rates + base allocation now? One of the reasons I left was that if I was going to be billed at API rates anyway, I'd just rather use the APIs. The value proposition still sucks for individuals now, when the other major providers are bundling at below-API rates.
There seems to be something strange going on with how it plays with the GHCP harness: I've experimented on a variety of inputs (code, plain text, literature search), and more than half the time it falls into an infinite text/tool call loop a la GPT-2. Which is a bit spooky as you're still being billed for those infinite loops! But when it works it works, and responses do seem a good deal cheaper than OAI/Anthropic equivalents, so hopefully they'll get it ironed out.
I believe it's one of the models you have to go in to your settings on and enable Chinese providers for to use. Could be mistaken. I wish there was a clear list on this.
I’d love a subsidized Kimi subscription too. The official Kimi subscription is always out of stock and doesn’t have great limits, while the K3 allotments on OpenCode and Cursor don’t seem to last very long either.
Kimi is expensive . Cursor with subscription is cheaper , grok 4.5 per task paid per tokens ( no subs ) is also cheaper .
If you willing to share to no zdr, meta is waaaaaay cheaper vs Kimi.
With recent offerings from spacex and meta , I hardly imagine why would you pay money to any Chinese vendor it’s not as cheap and it’s not as intelligent neither .
Maybe deepseek is an exception , but it’s only good for narrow use cases that probably goes into modal.com and other gpu + fine tune me easy vendors , not vanilla dumb but cheap model .
I'm willing to pay 2x for a 10% smarter model. Intelligence matters that much (because 10% smarter probably saves, on average, several hours of human time).
For building a full stack custom CRM and media pipeline tool with video conversion, transcription, and indexing. Supabase, AWS, Meili, NextJS, GCS - lots of surfaces and planes.
4.8 basically couldn't do it, I abandoned the project as the fallback was, "current business processes".
With F5 it's been 4 weeks and almost ready for production release.
I have the same quality results with Fable. With just a brief prompt, it created a great static website with a beautiful animation of a workflow. Gemini's output was so poor that I closed the chat. And with Codex, the results were bad, so I discarded them.
Agree. Opus 4.8 could make nice little toy and demo apps. This app had a lot of surfaces and pipeline, Postgres, vector search, S3 -- couldn't handle that. Fable 5 is still a lot of work and you have to check it, but it really does perform at senior eng level. Shipping good size features daily.
When I last used Cursor their subscription covered usage of ~$20 per month. Have they switched to a subsidized subscription model like ChatGPT and Claude?
>their subscription now goes way further than OpenAI or Anthropic.
Until it doesn't...
Honestly, this entire OpenAI reset credit fiasco this past week has convinced me to rip off the Codex and Claude Code bandaids and start building my own proper Pi Coding Agent running models that I select and pay for on openrouter.
And I am feeling a lot better about it now that I've finally got it working.
But still for US frontier you're paying 10-20x more per token compared to their limited subscriptions. For China frontier you'll be good though, and that might be the future anyway.
Relying on a single frontier model to just zero-shot all the work is so 2025.
Deepseek V4 Flash 0731 is surprisingly capable and cheap. [0]
Checkout pi coding agent. You can create as many different sub-agents as you wish, to specialize and understand and tackle or pass off any problem you like. It's refreshing, really. I feel like a coder in control again.
Your reason for the rate limit reset is speculative. Here's a history of them and tweets that correspond to when they happen. Others can be the judge if they believe the stated reasons or not: https://codex-resets.com/
Yeah, but it also makes budgeting hard. Normally you'd want to budget about 20% per day to use your whole week up in time. But since they reset usage sporadically, it becomes optimal to burn tokens as fast as possible to be as low as possible when they reset.
But since you don't know when resets are coming, it becomes kind of frustrating trying to game it out. One week they're resetting like crazy so you're trying to burn tokens as fast as possible. The next week they're not resetting at all so you have to adjust your workflow to be more conservative.
> use your whole week up in time [...] optimal to burn [...] trying to game it out [...] you're trying to burn tokens as fast
This whole thing sounds crazy to me, why are you so focused on making sure you hit 0% usage left when it's supposed to reset? Why can't you just use what you have and if it resets, it resets, and if it doesn't, it doesn't?
I've calculated I can spend about ~12% of usage every day, more or less, this is my "budget". If it resets, then the "12% per day" gets reset for that day, but that's it. Sounds crazy to me that I'd "invent work out of nowhere" just to spend more usage, why on earth would I adopt such a workflow? Sounds like you're burning tokens just to burn tokens???
If you spend $200 per month that's for X amount of work (represented as tokens) you can complete total. But if there are random resets then there's a different work maximization strategy. It's fine if you don't agree with it but it's not "crazy" behavior; it's completely rational to want to maximize a resource. It's not inventing work out of nowhere because there's more work to do than there are tokens in a week to do it. This is your assumption and why you've framed it as "crazy".
> it's completely rational to want to maximize a resource
Sure, in a video game where you have one attribute and you can minmax a strategy just focusing on that, but that's not how real-life works.
You can't just stack pending work on top of each other, expect yourself to be able to stay equally on top of everything and have the same results as if you didn't. With this comes the consideration about the tradeoffs of "produce mediocre but large body of works" vs "produce high quality but small body of works".
Who's to say what's more "rational" or not, it's not a straight-forward calculation which culminates in "Must consume all available usage to maximize resource usage" like some robot, as we are not.
It's quite literally inventing work out of nowhere as you wouldn't put the agent to do that and forcing yourself to be conscious about that work until it completes, unless you actually had the usage available. Asked another way, wouldn't your workflow clearly change if you had unlimited usage available? You'd probably attack tasks/problems that you didn't consider actually spending time/energy solving.
I don't get the point of this. We all seem to agree that these companies have almost no moat, if one stops being a good deal, you can switch to another. That doesn't invalidate the existence of a deal that is currently good.
My point was that chasing deals like this is just kicking the can down the road. You're going to have to reckon with harsh price increases sooner or later.
So I have resolved to avoid that future-dreading and fixed it, basically.
My entire digital existence for the last 20 years or so has been a parasitical relationship with VC funding. They keep throwing money at business models that involve building market share and I keep benefiting. It hasn't stopped working yet.
Based on your own comments, it sounds like it wasn't really that hard to address the problem though right? Let's be real, it takes like 10 minutes to download OpenCode and point it to DeepSeek V4 Flash. That's an amazing 80-20.
Seems weird to me to not take advantage of the great deal the frontier labs are currently giving for subscription pricing when there's such an easy fallback in the worst case.
switching cost is something you then have to pay everytime the deal changes.
the rest of the comment is about moving from expensive switching costs of what harness you are using to having the difference be closer to changing some config in openrouter
I often wonder if there's a chance, even if minimal... that they stole the weights of the Anthropic models they run on their datacenter... or are actively destillating it.
I think the more likely explanation is that the Cursor data they effectively acquired for $10B was extremely valuable for their training when combined with the insane number of GB300s xAI has for training.
I'm only being forced to use it at $WORK since some people overran their Cursor bill, so everyone gets Cursor Auto enabled by default which routes to Grok 4.5.
Yeah, sounds a bit like a selection bias, i.e. the people who managed to survive the firings by DOGE and the current admin are the kind of people who might prefer Grok.
I use. I used to be a Claude user. Since trying Grok 4.5 and especially Grok 4.6, I don't want to go back to Claude any more (I have early access to 4.6).
Grok is 3x+ faster than Claude and I can't tell the diff in engineering work quality. As an engineer, speed is important to me.
An hour in, I've been running four terminals full bore on my $20/mo Grok sub and I'm at 9% for the week. Codex or Claude would easily have hit 5-hour or weekly limits.
I'm really not burning tokens fast enough. I use Claude a lot, daily, and have yet to hit my a ceiling with my Max/100 subscription.
Maybe because I like to verify its outputs and spend a lot of time iterating to get better outcomes. Presumably if I just let it "do its thing" I'd burn more tokens and "get more done" but I'd lose my grasp on what's in the code base.
Big same here with Claude but I’m on the $200 sub. I let Fable run for roughly 4 hours and still didn’t hit the session limit. I suppose if I was running more in parallel it would be easier to hit, but I’m not particularly good at focusing on more than one thing at the same time (even if I’m waiting on an agent to do the work).
I hear you. I usually have two things going at once (either two different machines, two different projects, or different work trees if the same repo), but more than that I don't feel like I'm locked in enough to providing the "thinking" that Claude definitely still needs.
I've tried it on my "let's run every model in parallel and see which finds more edge cases" type of tasks, and Grok 4.5 was really behind Opus/ChatGPT but ahead of Gemini - despite having a strong showing on benchmarks.
That makes me really skeptical of it being GPT5.6-tier, much less Fable-tier, based on some of these benchmarks alone. But I'll test here shortly.
A bunch of SWEs at my work use it as their primary model.
We have Claude, ChatGPT, and Cursor with essentially no cap on spend (top guy is spending over 10K a month on AI at API prices), and he hasn't had his hand slapped.
So it's not like they are using it purely because it's cheaper.
I think people like to use it for its speaking style, pretty solid performance, and its speed.
It's much faster, so if you're not doing something cutting-edge, or you're doing the planning yourself and just using the LLM for implementation, the speed benefit outweighs the extra smarts of Fable/Opus5/Sol.
In most coding harnesses you can just instruct the agent to do so. When using Fable, I often say things like:
> Save your context. Always use a subagent (Opus 5 or GPT 5.6) for performing the implementation and then review the work yourself. You are the orchestrator and coordinator it’s up to you to ensure a cohesive final result.
I’ve done more or less the same thing with other agents/versions but with Fable consuming usage credits/tokens so quickly I do it more regularly than usual. I know people who will specify Composer (to my chagrin) as the implementing agent.
Addendum: this really goes a long way, and I can use a single chat session for days before I get into the context danger zone and need to compact/summarize.
I've used all of the models extensively and Grok is only "faster" because it claims to be done minutes after you ask it to do something. It does not produce results anywhere near the Anthropic or OpenAI models, it just hacks a tiny piece of what you ask for and says "I'm done!". I also notice Musk-isms leaking through the model. Multiple times it's told me "this is not a roast" or "I'm not roasting your code". People who use this model because they align with Musk's ideology are doing us all a favor and weeding themselves out of the competition.
It's a different type of model. In my admittedly judgemental observation, people that aren't the type to configure fully automated harnesses with good tools and skills and verifiers for their infrastructure and are way more interventionist in the way their agent works tend to like grok 4.5 more as the main agent. It's much faster and writes more simple and normal code that aligns a bit more with human written code. As an example, instead of sandboxing and simply verifying output artifacts they manually read and approve edits, suggest different code patterns, and manually approved shell commands. On the flip side it's not as good as fable when you need a relatively complex multi step thing done.
But in my experience, the overall productivity ends up similar, give you are willing to work with it in that way.
The grok build TUI harness is excellent and I really enjoyed using it.
For debugging and such I found it pretty much the same as other models.
Fable's taste in software abstraction and project planning in greenfield setups[1] is unmatched in my experience. Sol is OK. My primary use is launching tens of experiments that have to smartly use a limited pool of GPUs.
I use fable to start off the experiments, decide checkpoints, gpu alloc, where to sacrifice precision for performance, and then grok4.5 to iterate, tune, debug, eval, etc, within the abstraction and setup that fable initiated. I have fable write simple scripts that are then wrapped in skills for grok to use. Speed for that loop is extremely important for me, since I also apply human judgement there and I don't like waiting for model output.
I have tried Deepseek and such for the inner agent, but I desperately need multi-modal. Otherwise it's OK, but it tends to use tools less and rambles on and tries to reason with limited information and gets things wrong. Probably a relative la k of tool use posttraining. Gemini flash limits in google ai pro are too low for me to use to compare.
I use anthropic and openais models through grants and so can't compare subscription plan token budgets, but supergrok's budgets are satisfactory.
[1] aside, I have not yet met a model that continues off of a human codebase and actually follows the patterns reliably long term. Eventually it's all slop.
Yeah [1] is really a thing and SlopCodeBench (https://www.scbench.ai/) kind of measures that.
You need to manually push models to clean up the slop every now and then otherwise it becomes chaotic. And every change with LLMs is always extra lines.
For me it helps that back when xAI was the new hotness, after reading HN comments constantly advertising the free Grok credits they were giving out each month for developers with data sharing enabled, I eventually set aside my personal distaste figuring I might as well take advantage for Cline/Roo Code.
I opened a developer API account, loaded 5 dollars and got the free $100s of credits for the month. Like two weeks later, xAI announced they were shutting down the subsidized credits entirely lol. Didn’t even get a full month out of it, and closed my account entirely since I sure wasn’t ever going to put another penny of my own money in.
So my personal lesson was to ignore any hype about the latest “crazy value / unbeatable / free / subsidized X, Y or Z” from anything xAI/Elon adjacent in the future.
These days I get more than enough personal usage from Codex + OpenCode Go to put up with yet another xAI/Cursor offer treadmill, especially if it involves installing new tooling to get it.
I can respect if you say you hate their guts. Everyone has their worldview. But over moral or ethical stand? You don't have any if you're using Chinese models, or fly Middle East airlines, or countless of other products. Don't delude yourself.
I don’t like what is happening in my country, Elon is a huge part of that and I don’t want to reward it. I’m not a fanatic, but if all other things are equal I can certainly factor social responsibility into the equation. Fuck that rage baiting xenophobic nazi-salute throwing asshole. [edit spelling]
I have. He was using it due to philosophical reasons the same way many people have philosophical reasons for avoiding it. I don't know how many people are like that, but it's not exactly where you want to position your product if you're a business.
Personally - and I know I'm not alone with this sentiment based on comments I see on this site - I wouldn't touch Grok no matter how good or cheap it is. I don't trust Elon and I don't want to give another dollar to the world's richest person who turns around and uses the money to interfere with elections. The guy I know uses it for essentially the same reason I won't use it.
"Everyone's doing it" presented with no evidence is just you trying to make yourself feel better for:
- using from
- driving a Tesla
- voting for Trump
It's a really, really easy line to draw in the sand: don't support openly corrupt individuals.
It's absolutely true there's money in politics. To call all money in politics equally corrupt because Bernie got a dollar to have dinner with someone vs Elon effectively directly buying votes....
A complete lack of nuance here. And I wouldn't be surprised if corporations / super rich WANT you to think like that. The more defeatist the mentality becomes the more we just accept whatever they do next.
There's a big difference between quiet donations to a PAC - not that that's good either - and what Elon did. He literally paid for votes, likely in violation of the law. He poured more money into U.S. elections than anyone has before. He and Trump both made strange, cryptic statements about Elon's role in Pennsylvania with the voting machines that has caused people to reasonably wonder if they somehow manipulated the election. Whether he did or not, the innuendo alone is not ok. Then he did what he did in Germany. Don't even get me started on DOGE or his Starlink shenanigans in Ukraine.
That's before we even start talking about the models themselves. He claims to want "unbiased" models, but he very clearly has a distorted view of the world and has repeatedly demonstrated a desire and willingness to bend the world to his will. I don't want to use a model that is so obviously suspect. Not to mention, his models repeatedly produce racist, Nazi-like propaganda.
IMO, he is, at best, a clueless amateur masquerading as an expert and running into problems a more careful person manages to mostly avoid. At worst... well, you get the picture.
Versus Sam,Dario or the CCP? Im all for running local models but im sor far from being able to pay for a large model hardware setup. My strix halo box is like driving a beaten up vespa when the frontier models are Ferraris.
I probably have the same strix halo box as you. It's slow, although mostly tolerable, but even 128 GB isn't enough to run good models. Where that leaves us is giving money to somebody to get access to frontier models. I don't like any of those guys either, but some appear worse than others. FWIW, I mostly use Anthropic models. And CCP and their distilled models notwithstanding, at least they release open weight models at a lower cost. It's not like any American company can claim the higher ground these days anyway, especially when they trained their models on pirated content and trash our neighborhoods with their datacenters.
Yes, ethically Elon ranks lowest based on the past 5 years of questionable decisions, like uploading your entire codebase to their server without consent.
Elon is directly responsible for Grok becoming self-titled “MechaHitler” which the other three haven’t come close to matching yet.
Perhaps customers choosing your product for irrational philosophical reasons is exactly how you'd want to position your product if you're a business. When it comes to margins, the only thing better than a price-insensitive customer is a quality-insensitive customer.
> I have never met a single human being who uses Grok for coding
Me too. The only people I ever saw using grok were using it by accident as they used copilot in auto mode and noticed some prompts were thrown it's way.
I had a security incident the other day and Grok was the only model that would help. Claude and GPT refused on ethical grounds and only gave general advice. In an emergency, I'd only trust Grok. However, that's the only time I used Grok for coding (since Opus 4.8 it would take a lot to get me to switch away from Anthropic)
The "safety" guardrails in Anthropic and OpenAI models are becoming a noticeable problem for security work. And, the reason I'm keeping my Kimi subscription even though it's not a great deal; Kimi subscriptions are quite stingy for the price, but K3 will do vulnerability analysis and make a PoC without requiring you to be on the approved list of Fortune 500 or government entities that have access to Mythos or Daybreak.
I'm not touching Grok. But there are alternatives to Anthropic and OpenAI that don't refuse to do security work.
once my codex/claude weekly limit was gone, i gave it a try. It was surprisingly good, not dumb in any way, and fast. I now require it as a part of 3-of-3 quorum with any codebase change.
macOS Codex app is my main agent (its very polished). When it makes changes or code scans i ask it to run claude -p plus cursor-cli plus grok cli for double checking. This way bias of one model can be overruled by quorum.
Back in the day (in AI time) GitHub Copilot had Grok on the 0 github-token cost and I found it to be the best of the 0 github-token models for when my budget was out. Then they went to a multiplier that was not competitive and I haven't look back again. Been meaning too, but for personal use, Deepseek flash is so cheap I haven't felt like spending money elsewhere.
I recently decided to get an AI subscription and evaluated Grok vs chatgpt. Went with Grok because it's all-around good enough at day to day stuff, integrates with my Tesla, and the image/video generation is great. Kids love whimsical videos of them riding dinosaurs.
Feedback: I'd like Grok to have more connectors (I see OpenAI just added Apple Health, that would be nice to have, and I wish it could read my Onenote notebooks) and for existing ones to be improved. I gave it access to my gmail and asked it "what was my last electricity bill?". It failed to find it, even when I told it the exact subject line to search for. Something about not getting any data back when trying to get the email contents.
Not the model but the app - with Claude I can work on my mac using Cloud environments, leave the office, open Claude on my phone and respond. I can't change model if I have to stop that workflow.
Does xAI have plans to do Mac/iOS apps with cloud environments? When can we expect them?
Interesting. Grok 4.5 is a capable model, although not quite at Fable/Sol levels. Will be interesting to see how this holds up. Musk appears to have made a savvy choice buying Cursor's data.
SpaceXAI is the only frontier model company that had its own compute/date centres and soon chip making factory, I think they will pull ahead with cheaper tokens similar intelligence and better harness/tools. Grok build is 2-5x faster than Claude Code in my opinion.
Except EUV lithography is the most complicated industrial process that exists and they won't have usable yields for many years if ever. I don't think Musk actually expects these fans to ever actually make sense they just let him hype and distract.
Light generation is the most complicated part and Elon plans on doing Free Electron Laser (FEL) which is not as complicated as self contained tin based solution that ASML uses now
Why do you give Elon any credibility? FEL is not proven at all and is much much riskier than using existing EUV machines. Plus if it breaks all your machines are down until you fix it.
SpaceX is run by an absolute ghoul who managed to get away with securities fraud ("funding secured"), what makes you think there's any accountability left in public markets?
From Matt Levine's description, SpaceX has a governance model that explicitly makes it resistant to shareholder lawsuits. It's not a Delaware corporation.
It might or might not work long-term, but I wouldn't count on courts to help.
Corporations are legally required to maximize shareholder's value. If reaching that goal requires them to pretend to be transparent, or fudge the numbers that they show to the public, then that's what you can expect them to do.
> So you’re asserting that the ends justify the means or?
They claim that spacex has competitive advantage. They take no stance on condoning spacex’s behavior. Personally I strongly dislike musks behavior, but I appreciate discussion of competitive advantages/disadvantages, independent of moral views. I liked the thread, it adds new info to the conversation.
> I think they will pull ahead with cheaper tokens similar intelligence
They obviously have a huge token cost advantage of the AI labs they are renting compute to, at least for now while they can charge current crazy rates for GPU compute.
OpenAI is almost there, and Anthropic is pretty close behind. In the next year or two all major AI companies will be vertically integrated to a good degree.
highest selling is not same as cheap - apple also have the highest selling iphones among smartphones and they are still pretty much the most expensive (and usually not the best either these days).
> The Model 3 and Model Y became the highest selling EVs of all time because they were the first below $50K to have long-range and be worth buying.
And then Musk totally abandoned Tesla's original brilliant game plan of using the luxury models to find actual low-cost models (which $50K is not), and completely ceded the future EV market to Chinese companies that understand how to make a better car than Tesla for less money. BYD sells more cars than Tesla.
The answer is simple: They're willing to burn money faster than the others.
Nobody's profitable in this space, they can price it however they want as long as investors keep pouring money in. And SpaceX just got a lot of money poured in.
note that Grok's training, thanks to its portable gas generators that are magnitudes less efficient than even other integrated, permanent gas turbines, means the training for this model is dramatically less efficient than models like DeepSeek
a lot of the CO2 emission debate on AI is overblown but it's accurate for Grok
The rental deal can be terminated by either side with 90 days notice, and presumably Musk would do so if he needed the compute or generally thought it advantageous to do so. For now he doesn't need the compute.
The rental deal may also have been at least in part to juice the SpaceX IPO and to help Anthropic stick it to his enemy OpenAI.
Can someone explain to me what's the point of Grok anymore? I don't understand why we need a third or fourth closed frontier model. It is clear that chatGPT has locked down the consumer play, and may be Gemini is there. Claude has enterprise locked up, followed by chatGPT and Gemini. Enterprise switching costs are notoriously high, and even if they switch, they have chatGPT or Gemini to choose from. Beyond that, you have a vast array of open source models (DeepSeek, Kimi, and now Meta's Spark and Glimmer). So, why would anyone need a third or fourth frontier model and why would SpaceX spends billions in CapEx for a very small market share
Competition keeps service quality high and pricing low - even if you aren't using Grok, the mere existence of Grok keeps pricing for whatever provider you use lower and service faster and more reliable.
That's fair. But my point is from a business POV, why would SpaceX want to invests hundreds of billions of CapEx on a third or fourth frontier model, which cannot compete with chatGPT and claude on the high end, and getting squeezed by open weight models on the low end
They came here in three years. I think there’s a chance they will release the absolute top model soon. And I think they believe that as well. They have the compute. They have the money. They have the engineers.
Inference switching costs aren't high since the models are largely fungible. Even with proprietary harnesses you can hack them to use some other lab's model.
There are a few reasons people will be interested...
1. The CapEx play is interesting because it's not just Grok using the hardware. They have rented out hardware for others, including Google, to use. This is making xAI money.
2. It appears that Elon is building a suite of things that work together as part of the push to be multi-planetary. What AI will power the robots? I can understand the drive to have AI they can control to make sure it's appropriate for all the things they are dreaming up. This is a piece they don't want to outsource.
3. OpenAI and Anthropic models are expensive in terms of token costs. Sure, they are frontier. Neither appears to be trying to drive down expenses. This is a problem for heavy users. Companies are trying to put cost controls in place. Does the rest of SpaceX want those cost controls? Having a Frontier model that pushes the pace of driving down costs is really useful.
4. OpenAI and Anthropic are producing models with a progressive lean, according to the Neutrality Project [1]. Having a frontier model that is closer to the middle is considered a good thing by many who are noticing the bias.
These are just some of the reasons. Competition is often a good thing that drives useful change.
I sense a lot of condescension and lack of business acumen so I won't spend time writing it up, why don't you just ask your favorite AI or do some basic google searches? Elon was extremely upfront about the philosophical reasons for it, ever since he cofounded OpenAI.
I assume SpaceX does it because they figure it's a good source of revenue, and it means they can keep another thing in-house instead of relying on Anthropic or OpenAI for their AI needs.
As for why anyone else would want it: I've found it's a good model for coding, and it sometimes catches bugs that other models (especially open source models) don't always spot.
That’s how physical good work. But software, especially consumer software, works on a winner take all model. That’s why there are very few consumer companies and chatGPT is pretty much the only one after Meta, which was founded in 2004. The reason this happens is because consumer software can scale infinitely as there is zero marginal cost for a new user and there are very high switching costs. A single car company cannot scale to serve every single customer. Because it requires massive CapEx investment. But Google can serve every single search globally because the incremental cost to serve the additional consumer is essentially zero. That’s how these frontier models are eventually going to play out. There will be consolidation and winner take all. It has somewhat happened already with chatGPT taking over consumer and Claude taking over Enterprise. There will probably some long tail open source player, similar to Linux.
Its a bet for future world dominance by Elon: millions of robots managed by AI. Base on some observations I think something like that is going in his head.
That is good news for Grok team. However, most of the time cost comparing to the result is secondary, and better results and conclusions can come from mixing AI brains together.
I've been using grok 4.5 with grok build soon after it came out and dropped claude. primarily for personal code. It communicates better. While that might not sound like a big deal it is. It doesn't give me a wall of text, tells me what I need to know and I'll make the actual decisions. It is very quick as well which means the sessions are far more interactive, I'll be steering it more. I sometimes cross check with codex and sol, but the daily driver is grok for me.
I found it has improved my productivity and output over claude where it felt like claude was giving me work to do. furthermore with the recent claude watermarking thing, I'd rather use grok or openai.
If anyone is curious download grok cli and throw a couple of prompts at it. you'll be surprised.
Out of interest, do Musk's politics impact your decision on whether or not to use Grok? I'd be interested to know where folks lie on the (Agree / Disagree) and (Use / Don't use) axes.
i read an independent study that found other ai were all left of center (how ever one measures that, sentiment analysis normalized to a given population??). they said grok was evenly left/right split
but what's to validate any given population as centrist anyway
they suggested the ai opinion drift was caused by internet demographics not directly reflecting actual population i.e. California publishes more etc
In the US reality is substantially left of center. If someone asks you what 2+2 is then it's not halfway between 4 and 76 is it?
It's the majority position amongst Republicans that the Earth was created less than 10 years ago as is and Jesus may rapture all the believers in our lifetime. They believe childhood vaccines are dangerous and those over 30 favor the idea that being gay is a choice and immoral at that because they have no intrinsic idea of what right and wrong mean.
They believe Obama is a crypto Muslim born overseas and therefore somehow not a citizen despite citizenship being heritable.
They believe that the same ballots that elected Republican reps didn't represent a valid vote against Trump because it's unbelievable that folks voted against a pedophile in 2020.
Hell a 27 year crack addict is on TV alleging the Republican primary was stolen from him in a blue state and this is serious business in Republican Land.
The right wing has swung so far to the right that 2010 Republicans would be considered Left wing
I certainly have some political disagreements with Musk, but more than that I would say the way he runs his companies makes me extremely anxious. The man is just always talking about stuff that never actually happens. In practice it does seem like cooler heads prevail and Grok et al. have trajectories pretty in line with other major providers...but because they're pretty in line why take the risk? Why build on foundations that ostensibly could be re-tasked to produce a "woke free" Odyssey?
I avoid Grok for meaningful token spend on purpose/boycotting. I do check in via openrouter occasionally to check it's chat performance which has seemed fine to me since 4. My total grok spend has been ~$2. I disagree with his politics to a huge degree.
My token spend at api rates is about $3000 usd a month recently.
I disagree with Musk's politics but it does not impact my decision to use Grok. That's because being serious about aligning my capital to my values doesn't leave much in the way of eligible products or services. I consequently decide not to worry about this as a moral axis for my life.
Interesting question. I suppose it comes down to how much you allocate his involvement or presence to a product? I’d imagine Grok is built by hundreds of engineers who are all unique individuals from various backgrounds. If Elon simply “leads” from a very surface level where he has no direct day to day involvement in Grok releases does that make it more palatable? Or is the question really about how involved he is? Or is simply being the leader (even if he was 100% absent and only had his name attached to a project/company) enough to boycott?
On a similar note, how much Elon hate is about his politics vs his trillionaire status vs what I like to call “watercooler hate” where folks simply parrot the loudest opinion in order to be accepted into the group?
On a final note, my son is in primary school and recently brought up in a dinner time discussion that “Elon is really bad” - this is a kid who has no social media (unlike some of his peers who are already on TikTok) and doesn’t watch traditional media.
The man did a nazi salute on live TV, not once but twice. And you know he meant it. What else is there to doubt? Do you think a white supremacist can be a good person?
> The man did a nazi salute on live TV, not once but twice. And you know he meant it.
He's also publicly and militantly supported quite a few far right political parties throughout Europe, particularly those who have a long track record on race-based topics.
its pretty on the record that musk takes a direct role in writing the system prompts, no? and is eager to make updates if whatever ml products arent sufficiently matching the specific politics and musk adoration that he wants it to?
It does. I believe he is one of the worst people and contributed to misery of humanity. I had nothing against him until he dismantled USAID. The richest man in the world did not go to a party on weekend to make sure that poorest men on the world have less help. He was basically on the side of HIV.
So i never use his products.
Beside don't read too much in to benchmarks. They are alrrady ruined by Goldhart principle. Tgese models have already seen most of the data.
Absolutely, if there is any somewhat reasonable alternative, I will always use a non Musk product. Its less about morals but more about self interest. I am from Europe and Musk supports far right extremists and a breakup of the EU. I will not support and enable someone who intends to do me harm.
I've never used Grok, but I'm very dissatisfied with the writing style of frontier models from OpenAI and Anthropic. I only use them for coding now.
ChatGPT is very long-winded, sometimes producing multiple bullet point lists for a simple answer. Claude is full of mannerisms: 'not merely x, but y', 'Here's where it gets interesting', 'the real question is', etc.
The main issue I have with grok is that Musk, its owner, did 2x seig heil at the presidential inauguration, and proceeded to gaslight the world about it (this is a strong form of dogwhistling, kind of a dog bullhorn). Therefore all services which have anything to do with Musk are ineligible for use - they are directly funding the worst kind of person.
Grok is quite interesting. I run comparisons almost daily on tasks and Grok is its own beast, in a good way.
It's good to have model diversity. When I run a task across Sol, Terra, and Luna, I get variations of the same thing with diminishing quality. It makes the lineup pointless. Ditto for Anthropic. Gemini-3.6-Flash and 3.1 Pro genuinely behave differently. Opus 5 and Fable are.. cousins.
I find that when I want to test a complex creative challenge, having 4 "families" to choose from makes the experience interesting since they will excel in different areas.
Grok might implement unique lighting, Opus, elegant primitives, Sol, accurate snowfall in one pass, Gemini, silky movement. Combined, you can pick and choose best.
For what its worth, Grok always feels "messy" but finishes. Grok 4.6 though is no longer "smart and fast". It's about as fast as Sol though.
A big improvement I noticed in 4.6 was tool use for verification. Previously, Opus/Fable were the only models to consistently screenshot things that they can't directly interact with easily. Now Grok is probably right behind them, perhaps tied with Sol on propensity to verify visually. Grok 4.5 notably did not do this often.
satvikpendem | a day ago
aliljet | a day ago
timr | 23 hours ago
Right now, I find that Grok offers better value, uses fewer tokens per turn, and makes better code. I haven’t tried Cursor because I don’t want to change editors again, but maybe I should try it…
apitman | 22 hours ago
timr | 22 hours ago
taosx | 21 hours ago
https://harness.eveid.com/lazy-harness-cost-simulation
hyldmo | 20 hours ago
esafak | 22 hours ago
pickleRick243 | 21 hours ago
timr | 19 hours ago
https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/grok-4-6#token-use
So depending on how you want to define "token efficiency", Grok is either tied with OpenAI, or in the lead.
[1] Though I grant that 4.6 appears to be wordier, on the order of Terra max.
jesse_dot_id | a day ago
greenavocado | a day ago
CuriouslyC | 23 hours ago
greenavocado | 22 hours ago
hmokiguess | 23 hours ago
homakov | 23 hours ago
pkaye | 23 hours ago
timr | 23 hours ago
pkaye | 22 hours ago
https://github.com/features/copilot/plans
https://github.blog/changelog/2026-08-06-kimi-k3-is-now-avai...
timr | 22 hours ago
Have they converted entirely to transparent API rates + base allocation now? One of the reasons I left was that if I was going to be billed at API rates anyway, I'd just rather use the APIs. The value proposition still sucks for individuals now, when the other major providers are bundling at below-API rates.
krzyk | 20 hours ago
fuglede_ | 9 hours ago
tekwarder | 23 hours ago
msh | 23 hours ago
jauntywundrkind | 21 hours ago
msh | 5 hours ago
jeffyaw | 22 hours ago
shishcat | 22 hours ago
HDBaseT | 13 hours ago
Apparently 5x usage when using Kimi Code too.
maxdo | 20 hours ago
If you willing to share to no zdr, meta is waaaaaay cheaper vs Kimi.
With recent offerings from spacex and meta , I hardly imagine why would you pay money to any Chinese vendor it’s not as cheap and it’s not as intelligent neither .
Maybe deepseek is an exception , but it’s only good for narrow use cases that probably goes into modal.com and other gpu + fine tune me easy vendors , not vanilla dumb but cheap model .
nomilk | 23 hours ago
I'm willing to pay 2x for a 10% smarter model. Intelligence matters that much (because 10% smarter probably saves, on average, several hours of human time).
redox99 | 23 hours ago
I haven't tried so it's pure speculation based on benchmarks, but I'd assume Grok 4.6 is around Opus 4.8 in real world use, but clearly below Opus 5.
douglee650 | 23 hours ago
For building a full stack custom CRM and media pipeline tool with video conversion, transcription, and indexing. Supabase, AWS, Meili, NextJS, GCS - lots of surfaces and planes.
4.8 basically couldn't do it, I abandoned the project as the fallback was, "current business processes".
With F5 it's been 4 weeks and almost ready for production release.
mandeepj | 21 hours ago
douglee650 | 17 hours ago
vorticalbox | 22 hours ago
It’s not as quite as smart as opus 4.8 but it’s close and x4 the cheaper.
Computer0 | 21 hours ago
satvikpendem | 21 hours ago
johnnyApplePRNG | 21 hours ago
Until it doesn't...
Honestly, this entire OpenAI reset credit fiasco this past week has convinced me to rip off the Codex and Claude Code bandaids and start building my own proper Pi Coding Agent running models that I select and pay for on openrouter.
And I am feeling a lot better about it now that I've finally got it working.
unglaublich | 20 hours ago
maxdo | 20 hours ago
indigodaddy | 17 hours ago
satvikpendem | 6 hours ago
johnnyApplePRNG | 19 hours ago
Deepseek V4 Flash 0731 is surprisingly capable and cheap. [0]
Checkout pi coding agent. You can create as many different sub-agents as you wish, to specialize and understand and tackle or pass off any problem you like. It's refreshing, really. I feel like a coder in control again.
[0] https://arcprize.org/results/deepseek-v4-flash-0731
embedding-shape | 20 hours ago
Huh, what's happened? I'm on the 20x plan and haven't noticed any fiasco, what went down exactly?
ModernMech | 20 hours ago
wetoastfood | 20 hours ago
throwaway314155 | 16 hours ago
ModernMech | 15 hours ago
But since you don't know when resets are coming, it becomes kind of frustrating trying to game it out. One week they're resetting like crazy so you're trying to burn tokens as fast as possible. The next week they're not resetting at all so you have to adjust your workflow to be more conservative.
embedding-shape | 8 hours ago
This whole thing sounds crazy to me, why are you so focused on making sure you hit 0% usage left when it's supposed to reset? Why can't you just use what you have and if it resets, it resets, and if it doesn't, it doesn't?
I've calculated I can spend about ~12% of usage every day, more or less, this is my "budget". If it resets, then the "12% per day" gets reset for that day, but that's it. Sounds crazy to me that I'd "invent work out of nowhere" just to spend more usage, why on earth would I adopt such a workflow? Sounds like you're burning tokens just to burn tokens???
ModernMech | 6 hours ago
embedding-shape | 6 hours ago
Sure, in a video game where you have one attribute and you can minmax a strategy just focusing on that, but that's not how real-life works.
You can't just stack pending work on top of each other, expect yourself to be able to stay equally on top of everything and have the same results as if you didn't. With this comes the consideration about the tradeoffs of "produce mediocre but large body of works" vs "produce high quality but small body of works".
Who's to say what's more "rational" or not, it's not a straight-forward calculation which culminates in "Must consume all available usage to maximize resource usage" like some robot, as we are not.
It's quite literally inventing work out of nowhere as you wouldn't put the agent to do that and forcing yourself to be conscious about that work until it completes, unless you actually had the usage available. Asked another way, wouldn't your workflow clearly change if you had unlimited usage available? You'd probably attack tasks/problems that you didn't consider actually spending time/energy solving.
ModernMech | 5 hours ago
hgoel | 20 hours ago
I don't get the point of this. We all seem to agree that these companies have almost no moat, if one stops being a good deal, you can switch to another. That doesn't invalidate the existence of a deal that is currently good.
johnnyApplePRNG | 19 hours ago
My point was that chasing deals like this is just kicking the can down the road. You're going to have to reckon with harsh price increases sooner or later.
So I have resolved to avoid that future-dreading and fixed it, basically.
andybak | 19 hours ago
rsanek | 15 hours ago
Seems weird to me to not take advantage of the great deal the frontier labs are currently giving for subscription pricing when there's such an easy fallback in the worst case.
8note | 13 hours ago
the rest of the comment is about moving from expensive switching costs of what harness you are using to having the difference be closer to changing some config in openrouter
satvikpendem | 5 hours ago
everfrustrated | 20 hours ago
indigodaddy | 17 hours ago
btreecat | 6 hours ago
thiago_fm | a day ago
connicpu | a day ago
winstonp | a day ago
bpodgursky | 23 hours ago
qudat | a day ago
I just assumed every model manufacturer is distilling from the frontier models. If they aren't they are definitely trying to do it.
scottyah | 22 hours ago
nylonstrung | a day ago
sidcool | a day ago
supriyo-biswas | a day ago
kvirani | a day ago
dogmayor | 23 hours ago
nozzlegear | 22 hours ago
dfedbeef | 23 hours ago
Gigachad | 20 hours ago
visopsys | a day ago
Grok is 3x+ faster than Claude and I can't tell the diff in engineering work quality. As an engineer, speed is important to me.
bigyabai | a day ago
visopsys | a day ago
drewnick | a day ago
insane_dreamer | 23 hours ago
Maybe because I like to verify its outputs and spend a lot of time iterating to get better outcomes. Presumably if I just let it "do its thing" I'd burn more tokens and "get more done" but I'd lose my grasp on what's in the code base.
rubyn00bie | 21 hours ago
insane_dreamer | 17 hours ago
DetroitThrow | a day ago
That makes me really skeptical of it being GPT5.6-tier, much less Fable-tier, based on some of these benchmarks alone. But I'll test here shortly.
DetroitThrow | 23 hours ago
busch_j | a day ago
We have Claude, ChatGPT, and Cursor with essentially no cap on spend (top guy is spending over 10K a month on AI at API prices), and he hasn't had his hand slapped.
So it's not like they are using it purely because it's cheaper.
I think people like to use it for its speaking style, pretty solid performance, and its speed.
redox99 | 23 hours ago
logicchains | 23 hours ago
rlt | 23 hours ago
esafak | 22 hours ago
phoghed | 22 hours ago
rubyn00bie | 21 hours ago
> Save your context. Always use a subagent (Opus 5 or GPT 5.6) for performing the implementation and then review the work yourself. You are the orchestrator and coordinator it’s up to you to ensure a cohesive final result.
I’ve done more or less the same thing with other agents/versions but with Fable consuming usage credits/tokens so quickly I do it more regularly than usual. I know people who will specify Composer (to my chagrin) as the implementing agent.
Addendum: this really goes a long way, and I can use a single chat session for days before I get into the context danger zone and need to compact/summarize.
redox99 | 22 hours ago
slowin | 20 hours ago
porridgeraisin | 22 hours ago
But in my experience, the overall productivity ends up similar, give you are willing to work with it in that way.
The grok build TUI harness is excellent and I really enjoyed using it.
For debugging and such I found it pretty much the same as other models.
Fable's taste in software abstraction and project planning in greenfield setups[1] is unmatched in my experience. Sol is OK. My primary use is launching tens of experiments that have to smartly use a limited pool of GPUs.
I use fable to start off the experiments, decide checkpoints, gpu alloc, where to sacrifice precision for performance, and then grok4.5 to iterate, tune, debug, eval, etc, within the abstraction and setup that fable initiated. I have fable write simple scripts that are then wrapped in skills for grok to use. Speed for that loop is extremely important for me, since I also apply human judgement there and I don't like waiting for model output.
I have tried Deepseek and such for the inner agent, but I desperately need multi-modal. Otherwise it's OK, but it tends to use tools less and rambles on and tries to reason with limited information and gets things wrong. Probably a relative la k of tool use posttraining. Gemini flash limits in google ai pro are too low for me to use to compare.
I use anthropic and openais models through grants and so can't compare subscription plan token budgets, but supergrok's budgets are satisfactory.
[1] aside, I have not yet met a model that continues off of a human codebase and actually follows the patterns reliably long term. Eventually it's all slop.
redox99 | 20 hours ago
You need to manually push models to clean up the slop every now and then otherwise it becomes chaotic. And every change with LLMs is always extra lines.
LeBit | a day ago
wilburx3 | 23 hours ago
qlte | 22 hours ago
I opened a developer API account, loaded 5 dollars and got the free $100s of credits for the month. Like two weeks later, xAI announced they were shutting down the subsidized credits entirely lol. Didn’t even get a full month out of it, and closed my account entirely since I sure wasn’t ever going to put another penny of my own money in.
So my personal lesson was to ignore any hype about the latest “crazy value / unbeatable / free / subsidized X, Y or Z” from anything xAI/Elon adjacent in the future.
These days I get more than enough personal usage from Codex + OpenCode Go to put up with yet another xAI/Cursor offer treadmill, especially if it involves installing new tooling to get it.
jryle70 | 23 hours ago
epolanski | 23 hours ago
scottyah | 22 hours ago
andriy_koval | 20 hours ago
mirekrusin | 20 hours ago
andriy_koval | 20 hours ago
mirekrusin | 10 hours ago
andriy_koval | 10 hours ago
mirekrusin | 10 hours ago
Making it open weight does the opposite – it allows traffic to not be routed through them at all.
andriy_koval | an hour ago
LastTrain | 20 hours ago
randomNumber7 | 19 hours ago
LastTrain | 16 hours ago
jm4 | a day ago
Personally - and I know I'm not alone with this sentiment based on comments I see on this site - I wouldn't touch Grok no matter how good or cheap it is. I don't trust Elon and I don't want to give another dollar to the world's richest person who turns around and uses the money to interfere with elections. The guy I know uses it for essentially the same reason I won't use it.
inferniac | 23 hours ago
thats a very dumb reason considering all rich people do it, most are just not as open about it as Musk
MisterKent | 23 hours ago
It's a really, really easy line to draw in the sand: don't support openly corrupt individuals.
It's absolutely true there's money in politics. To call all money in politics equally corrupt because Bernie got a dollar to have dinner with someone vs Elon effectively directly buying votes....
A complete lack of nuance here. And I wouldn't be surprised if corporations / super rich WANT you to think like that. The more defeatist the mentality becomes the more we just accept whatever they do next.
jm4 | 23 hours ago
That's before we even start talking about the models themselves. He claims to want "unbiased" models, but he very clearly has a distorted view of the world and has repeatedly demonstrated a desire and willingness to bend the world to his will. I don't want to use a model that is so obviously suspect. Not to mention, his models repeatedly produce racist, Nazi-like propaganda.
IMO, he is, at best, a clueless amateur masquerading as an expert and running into problems a more careful person manages to mostly avoid. At worst... well, you get the picture.
christkv | 23 hours ago
jm4 | 22 hours ago
bakies | 19 hours ago
Grombobulous | 22 hours ago
Elon would be in prison for SEC violations if the current administration hadn’t been elected, and that’s only the tip of the iceberg with that guy.
iAMkenough | 22 hours ago
Elon is directly responsible for Grok becoming self-titled “MechaHitler” which the other three haven’t come close to matching yet.
BurningFrog | 22 hours ago
Calling it "interfering with elections" is utterly bizarre to me.
post-it | 22 hours ago
bix6 | 22 hours ago
highfrequency | 22 hours ago
mpalczewski | 20 hours ago
conception | 19 hours ago
jLaForest | 17 hours ago
peder | a day ago
locknitpicker | 23 hours ago
Me too. The only people I ever saw using grok were using it by accident as they used copilot in auto mode and noticed some prompts were thrown it's way.
I saw far more people using Mistral than grok.
treexs | 23 hours ago
nomilk | 23 hours ago
gessha | 23 hours ago
SwellJoe | 23 hours ago
I'm not touching Grok. But there are alternatives to Anthropic and OpenAI that don't refuse to do security work.
mohamedkoubaa | 23 hours ago
inferniac | 23 hours ago
homakov | 23 hours ago
bitcurious | 22 hours ago
Say more about this.
homakov | 20 hours ago
petesergeant | 23 hours ago
unselect5917 | 23 hours ago
SkyBelow | 22 hours ago
thenatureboy | 22 hours ago
sergiotapia | 22 hours ago
mvdtnz | 22 hours ago
vlucas | 22 hours ago
I don't give a shit about Elon's politics in the same way I don't give a shit about Dario or Altman's politics.
Rover222 | 14 hours ago
satvikpendem | 21 hours ago
fierycatnet | 20 hours ago
pzo | a day ago
In my experience in heavy coding sessions most pricing is just cache read and cache write like 80% of my token bill.
tomr75 | 21 hours ago
pzo | 20 hours ago
sidcool | 23 hours ago
leerob | 23 hours ago
qwerpy | 23 hours ago
Feedback: I'd like Grok to have more connectors (I see OpenAI just added Apple Health, that would be nice to have, and I wish it could read my Onenote notebooks) and for existing ones to be improved. I gave it access to my gmail and asked it "what was my last electricity bill?". It failed to find it, even when I told it the exact subject line to search for. Something about not getting any data back when trying to get the email contents.
happyopossum | 22 hours ago
nailer | 20 hours ago
satvikpendem | 21 hours ago
leerob | 20 hours ago
nailer | 20 hours ago
Does xAI have plans to do Mac/iOS apps with cloud environments? When can we expect them?
guywithabike | 20 hours ago
miohtama | 19 hours ago
https://t3.codes/
https://happier.dev/
https://paseo.sh/
All of these also enable multi vendor LLMs.
MrBuddyCasino | 22 hours ago
Pretty good bang for the buck.
petesergeant | 23 hours ago
small_model | 23 hours ago
UltraSane | 23 hours ago
krakrum | 22 hours ago
UltraSane | 20 hours ago
zzzoom | 16 hours ago
ls612 | 20 hours ago
UltraSane | 19 hours ago
ls612 | 13 hours ago
UltraSane | 13 hours ago
isodev | 23 hours ago
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/15/elon-musk...
hotstickyballs | 23 hours ago
feifan | 22 hours ago
amarka | 22 hours ago
stackghost | 21 hours ago
stickfigure | 21 hours ago
It might or might not work long-term, but I wouldn't count on courts to help.
kendalf89 | 19 hours ago
kuhaku22 | 20 minutes ago
This is a myth.
small_model | 21 hours ago
Computer0 | 21 hours ago
davidguetta | 21 hours ago
dongttebayo | 19 hours ago
I’m confused by how your reply makes sense in the context of the parent comment. They weren’t stating a preference, they were linking to simple facts.
Please do better.
pinkmuffinere | 16 hours ago
They claim that spacex has competitive advantage. They take no stance on condoning spacex’s behavior. Personally I strongly dislike musks behavior, but I appreciate discussion of competitive advantages/disadvantages, independent of moral views. I liked the thread, it adds new info to the conversation.
throw10920 | 16 hours ago
No, they're not. You're making up things and pretending that they said them.
> Please do better.
You're badly breaking the HN guidelines. Please review them: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
josefresco | 15 hours ago
throw10920 | 15 hours ago
This is factually incorrect. I did not say anything "snarky" or "mean". I stated facts and pointed out that the poster was breaking the guidelines.
walthamstow | 20 hours ago
gengelbro | 20 hours ago
Rover222 | 19 hours ago
9cb14c1ec0 | 23 hours ago
They obviously have a huge token cost advantage of the AI labs they are renting compute to, at least for now while they can charge current crazy rates for GPU compute.
paxys | 22 hours ago
alfalfasprout | 16 hours ago
pzo | 22 hours ago
they just increased cache read from 0.30 to 0.50 - this has the biggest impact on agentic coding. Elon companies have the most expensive everything:
xAI sub: $30 when other starts at $20, pro like sub for $300 where other charge $200.
Expensive electric cars, powerwalls, solar roofs when competetive products/better are cheaper.
heaney-555 | 20 hours ago
The Model 3 and Model Y became the highest selling EVs of all time because they were the first below $50K to have long-range and be worth buying.
Until a few years ago, every other sub-$50K EV absolutely sucked.
pzo | 20 hours ago
kibwen | 18 hours ago
And then Musk totally abandoned Tesla's original brilliant game plan of using the luxury models to find actual low-cost models (which $50K is not), and completely ceded the future EV market to Chinese companies that understand how to make a better car than Tesla for less money. BYD sells more cars than Tesla.
redox99 | 20 hours ago
throw10920 | 16 hours ago
This is meaningless because you're not controlling for amount of subsidized usage or model quality.
kibwen | 17 hours ago
To say that I somewhat doubt this would be an understatement.
asadotzler | 15 hours ago
Google would like a word. Also, Microsoft.
unified101 | 6 hours ago
insane_dreamer | 23 hours ago
petesergeant | 23 hours ago
iSloth | 23 hours ago
mrguyorama | 22 hours ago
stickfigure | 21 hours ago
Nobody's profitable in this space, they can price it however they want as long as investors keep pouring money in. And SpaceX just got a lot of money poured in.
mohamedkoubaa | 21 hours ago
slopinthebag | 19 hours ago
mchusma | 23 hours ago
paimapi | 23 hours ago
here's Stanford HAI's graph on the carbon emitted from model training per model:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/media-library/chart-showing-estima...
note that Grok's training, thanks to its portable gas generators that are magnitudes less efficient than even other integrated, permanent gas turbines, means the training for this model is dramatically less efficient than models like DeepSeek
a lot of the CO2 emission debate on AI is overblown but it's accurate for Grok
rd | 23 hours ago
JLO64 | 22 hours ago
scottyah | 22 hours ago
Strom | 20 hours ago
HarHarVeryFunny | 20 hours ago
The rental deal can be terminated by either side with 90 days notice, and presumably Musk would do so if he needed the compute or generally thought it advantageous to do so. For now he doesn't need the compute.
The rental deal may also have been at least in part to juice the SpaceX IPO and to help Anthropic stick it to his enemy OpenAI.
everfrustrated | 20 hours ago
Rover222 | 19 hours ago
mortenjorck | 19 hours ago
Deals like this that look awkward from the outside but are mutually beneficial to both participants exist everywhere.
zzzoom | 16 hours ago
ipaddr | 23 hours ago
t1234s | 23 hours ago
andrewinardeer | 21 hours ago
sillysaurusx | 16 hours ago
not_a_bot_4sho | 20 hours ago
thegagne | 19 hours ago
dmode | 22 hours ago
siliconc0w | 22 hours ago
dmode | 22 hours ago
siliconc0w | 21 hours ago
Gigachad | 20 hours ago
jeffhuys | 20 hours ago
hnav | 22 hours ago
mfer | 22 hours ago
1. The CapEx play is interesting because it's not just Grok using the hardware. They have rented out hardware for others, including Google, to use. This is making xAI money.
2. It appears that Elon is building a suite of things that work together as part of the push to be multi-planetary. What AI will power the robots? I can understand the drive to have AI they can control to make sure it's appropriate for all the things they are dreaming up. This is a piece they don't want to outsource.
3. OpenAI and Anthropic models are expensive in terms of token costs. Sure, they are frontier. Neither appears to be trying to drive down expenses. This is a problem for heavy users. Companies are trying to put cost controls in place. Does the rest of SpaceX want those cost controls? Having a Frontier model that pushes the pace of driving down costs is really useful.
4. OpenAI and Anthropic are producing models with a progressive lean, according to the Neutrality Project [1]. Having a frontier model that is closer to the middle is considered a good thing by many who are noticing the bias.
These are just some of the reasons. Competition is often a good thing that drives useful change.
[1] https://neutralityproject.org/
scottyah | 22 hours ago
midnightbobarun | 22 hours ago
As for why anyone else would want it: I've found it's a good model for coding, and it sometimes catches bugs that other models (especially open source models) don't always spot.
bilsbie | 22 hours ago
ukuina | 22 hours ago
https://www.autoblog.com/news/nissan-reports-fifth-straight-...
VariousPrograms | 22 hours ago
dmode | 20 hours ago
phoghed | 22 hours ago
reylas | 21 hours ago
andriy_koval | 20 hours ago
lukewarm707 | 19 hours ago
that alone makes it the closed source subscription i would choose. claude and openai are spying on you.
as it stands i don't have it because the reasoning is encrypted, so i feel that it still is not working for me, it's two faced.
osinix | 21 hours ago
LZ_Khan | 20 hours ago
heaney-555 | 20 hours ago
LZ_Khan | 18 hours ago
btreecat | 6 hours ago
maxdo | 20 hours ago
I used auto in cursor it’s much faster va Claude code and as good.
mpalczewski | 20 hours ago
I found it has improved my productivity and output over claude where it felt like claude was giving me work to do. furthermore with the recent claude watermarking thing, I'd rather use grok or openai.
If anyone is curious download grok cli and throw a couple of prompts at it. you'll be surprised.
nopurpose | 20 hours ago
zingababba | 20 hours ago
3abiton | 10 hours ago
I am curious, is that a plugin, or skill?
Rover222 | 19 hours ago
soVeryTired | 19 hours ago
gafferongames | 18 hours ago
JKCalhoun | 18 hours ago
He's become a toxic "brand".
tsegratis | 18 hours ago
but what's to validate any given population as centrist anyway
they suggested the ai opinion drift was caused by internet demographics not directly reflecting actual population i.e. California publishes more etc
michaelmrose | 18 hours ago
It's the majority position amongst Republicans that the Earth was created less than 10 years ago as is and Jesus may rapture all the believers in our lifetime. They believe childhood vaccines are dangerous and those over 30 favor the idea that being gay is a choice and immoral at that because they have no intrinsic idea of what right and wrong mean.
They believe Obama is a crypto Muslim born overseas and therefore somehow not a citizen despite citizenship being heritable.
They believe that the same ballots that elected Republican reps didn't represent a valid vote against Trump because it's unbelievable that folks voted against a pedophile in 2020.
Hell a 27 year crack addict is on TV alleging the Republican primary was stolen from him in a blue state and this is serious business in Republican Land.
The right wing has swung so far to the right that 2010 Republicans would be considered Left wing
aeturnum | 18 hours ago
[1] https://futurism.com/future-society/elon-musk-ai-woke-free-o...
Computer0 | 18 hours ago
My token spend at api rates is about $3000 usd a month recently.
snapplebobapple | 17 hours ago
notfromhere | 16 hours ago
Natfan | 14 hours ago
episode404 | 7 hours ago
Natfan | 7 hours ago
8note | 13 hours ago
coder-3 | 17 hours ago
milchek | 17 hours ago
On a similar note, how much Elon hate is about his politics vs his trillionaire status vs what I like to call “watercooler hate” where folks simply parrot the loudest opinion in order to be accepted into the group?
On a final note, my son is in primary school and recently brought up in a dinner time discussion that “Elon is really bad” - this is a kid who has no social media (unlike some of his peers who are already on TikTok) and doesn’t watch traditional media.
wfvr | 16 hours ago
locknitpicker | 12 hours ago
He's also publicly and militantly supported quite a few far right political parties throughout Europe, particularly those who have a long track record on race-based topics.
darkoob12 | 12 hours ago
8note | 13 hours ago
darkoob12 | 12 hours ago
Beside don't read too much in to benchmarks. They are alrrady ruined by Goldhart principle. Tgese models have already seen most of the data.
Paradigma11 | 9 hours ago
rubslopes | 17 hours ago
ChatGPT is very long-winded, sometimes producing multiple bullet point lists for a simple answer. Claude is full of mannerisms: 'not merely x, but y', 'Here's where it gets interesting', 'the real question is', etc.
indigodaddy | 17 hours ago
Gud | 7 hours ago
Claude suggests something, then later on suddenly it's something I wanted all along. ChatGPT is far superior to Claude. I will try Grok.
onesandofgrain | 20 hours ago
theyliesoeasily | 19 hours ago
unsupp0rted | 19 hours ago
dizlexic | 19 hours ago
dudeinhawaii | 16 hours ago
It's good to have model diversity. When I run a task across Sol, Terra, and Luna, I get variations of the same thing with diminishing quality. It makes the lineup pointless. Ditto for Anthropic. Gemini-3.6-Flash and 3.1 Pro genuinely behave differently. Opus 5 and Fable are.. cousins.
I find that when I want to test a complex creative challenge, having 4 "families" to choose from makes the experience interesting since they will excel in different areas.
Grok might implement unique lighting, Opus, elegant primitives, Sol, accurate snowfall in one pass, Gemini, silky movement. Combined, you can pick and choose best.
For what its worth, Grok always feels "messy" but finishes. Grok 4.6 though is no longer "smart and fast". It's about as fast as Sol though.
A big improvement I noticed in 4.6 was tool use for verification. Previously, Opus/Fable were the only models to consistently screenshot things that they can't directly interact with easily. Now Grok is probably right behind them, perhaps tied with Sol on propensity to verify visually. Grok 4.5 notably did not do this often.
0xEnsp1re | 6 hours ago