5 ms·

The biggest complaint I (and several others) have is that we continuously hit the limit via the UI after even just a few intensive queries. Of course, we can us

The biggest complaint I (and several others) have is that we continuously hit the limit via the UI after even just a few intensive queries. Of course, we can use the console API, but then we lose ability to have things like Projects, etc. Do you foresee these limitations increasing anytime soon? Quick Edit: Just wanted to also say thank you for all your hard work, Claude has been phenomenal.

eschluntz 2y ago
We are definitely aware of this (and working on it for the web UI), and that's why Claude Code goes directly through the API!
- smallerfish 2y ago
  I'm sure many of us would gladly pay more to get 3-5x the limit. And I'm also sure that you're working on it, but some kind of auto-summarization of facts to reduce the context in order to avoid penalizing long threads would be sweet. I don't know if your internal users are dogfooding the product that has user limits, so you may not have had this feedback - it makes me irritable/stressed to know that I'm running up close to the limit without having gotten to the bottom of a bug. I don't think stress response in your users is a desirable thing :).
  - stribbon 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - justinbaker84 2y ago
    This is the main point I always want to communicate to the teams building foundation models. A lot of people just want the ability to pay more in order to get more. I would gladly pay 10x more to get relatively modest increases in performance. That is how important the intelligence is.
    - willsmith72 2y ago
      As a growth company, they likely would prefer a larger amount of users even with occasional rate limits, vs smaller pool of power users. As long as capacity is an issue, you can't have both
      - cruffle_duffle 2y ago
        If people are paying for use, then why can’t you have both?
        saulpw 2y ago
        It takes time to grow capacity to meet growing revenue/usage. As parent is saying, if you are in a growth market at time T with capacity X, you would rather have more people using it even if that means they can each use less.
        brador 2y ago
        If you can’t scale with your customer base fire your CTO.
- sealthedeal 2y ago
  I haven't been able to find ClaudeCLI for pubic access yet. Would love to use.
  - eschluntz 2y ago
    >>> npm install -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code >>> claude
  - kkarpkkarp 2y ago
    see https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-code/overview https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-c...
- raylad 2y ago
  The problem with the API is that it, as it says in the documentation, could cost $100/hr. I would pay $50/mo or something to be able to have reasonable use of Claude Code in a limited (but not as limited) way as through the web UI, but all of these coding tools seem to work only with the API and are therefore either too expensive or too limited.
  - rudedogg 2y ago
    > The problem with the API is that it, as it says in the documentation, could cost $100/hr. I've used https://github.com/cline/cline https://github.com/cline/cline to get a similar workflow to their Claude Code demo, and yes it's amazing how quickly the token counts add up. Claude seems to have capacity issues so I'm guessing they decided to charge a premium for what they can serve up. +1 on the too expensive or too limited sentiment. I subscribed to Claude for quite a while but got frustrated the few times I would use it heavily I'd get stuck due to the rate limits. I could stomach a $20-$50 subscription for something like 3.7 that I could use a lot when coding, and not worry about hitting limits (or I suspect being pushed on to a quantized/smaller model when used too much).
    - jasonjmcghee 2y ago
      Claude Code does caching well fwiw. Looking my costs after a few code sessions (totaling $6 or so) the vast majority is cache read, which is great to see. Without caching it'd be wildly more expensive. Like $5+ was cache read ($0.05/token vs $3/token) so it would have cost $300+
clangfan 2y ago
this is also my problem, ive only used the UI with $20 subscription, can I use the same subscription to use the cli? I'm afraid its like those aws api billing where there is no limit to how much I can use then get a surprise bill
- eschluntz 2y ago
  It is API billing like AWS - you pay for what you use. Every time you exit a session we print the cost, and in the middle of a session you can do /cost to see your cost so far that session! You can track costs in a few ways and set spend limits to avoid surprises: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-code/overview#manage-costs-effectively https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-c...
  - mindok 2y ago
    Which is theoretically great, but if anyone can get an Aussie credit card to work, please let me know.
    - robbiep 2y ago
      I haven’t had an issue with Aussie cards? But I still hit limits, I use Claudemind with jetbrains stuff and there is a max of input tokens (j believe), I am ‘tier 2’ but doesn’t look like I can go past this without an enterprise agreement
    - zzygan 2y ago
      No issue with AU credit card here. Is a credit card and not a debit card though
  - danw1979 2y ago
    What I really want (as a current Pro subscriber) is a subscription tier ("Ultimate" at ~$120/month ?) that gives me priority access to the usual chat interface, but _also_ a bunch of API credits that would ensure Claude and I can code together for most of the average working month (reasonable estimate would be 4 hours a day, 15 days a month). i.e I'd like my chat and API usage to be all included under a flat-rate subscription. Currenty Pro doesn't give me any API credits to use with coding assistants (Claude Code included ?) which is completely disjointed. And I need to be a business to use the API still ? Honestly, Claude is so good, just please take my money and make it easy to do the above !
punkpeye 2y ago
If you are open to alternatives, try https://glama.ai/gateway https://glama.ai/gateway We currently serve ~10bn tokens per day (across all models). OpenAI compatible API. No rate limits. Built in logging and tracing. I work with LLMs every day, so I am always on top of adding models. 3.7 is also already available. https://glama.ai/models/claude-3-7-sonnet-20250219 https://glama.ai/models/claude-3-7-sonnet-20250219 The gateway is integrated directly into our chat (https://glama.ai/chat https://glama.ai/chat). So you can use most of the things that you are used to having with Claude. And if anything is missing, just let me know and I will prioritize it. If you check our Discord, I have a decent track record of being receptive to feedback and quickly turning around features. Long term, Glama's focus is predominantly on MCPs, but chat, gateway and LLM routing is integral to the greater vision. I would love feedback if you are going to give a try frank@glama.ai
- airstrike 2y ago
  The issue isn't API limits, but web UI limits. We can always get around the web interface's limits by using the claude API directly but then you need to have some other interface...
  - punkpeye 2y ago
    The API still has limits. Even if you are on the highest tier, you will quickly run into those limits when using coding assistants. The value proposition of Glama is that it combines UI and API. While everyone focuses on either one or the other, I've been splitting my time equally working on both. Glama UI would not win against Anthropic if we were to compare them by the number of features. However, the components that I developed were created with craft and love. You have access to: * Switch models between OpenAI/Anthropic, etc. * Side-by-side conversations * Full-text search of all your conversations * Integration of LaTeX, Mermaid, rich-text editing * Vision (uploading images) * Response personalizations * MCP * Every action has a shortcut via cmd+k (ctrl+k)
    - airstrike 2y ago
      Ok, but that's not the issue the parent was mentioning. I've never hit API limits but, like the original comment mentioned, I too constantly hit the web interface limits particularly when discussing relatively large modules.
mianos 2y ago
I paid for it for a while, but I kept running out of usage limits right in the middle of work every day. I'd end up pasting the context into ChatGPT to continue. It was so frustrating, especially because I really liked it and used it a lot. It became such an anti-pattern that I stopped paying. Now, when people ask me which one to use, I always say I like Claude more than others, but I don’t recommend using it in a professional setting.
- zaptrem 2y ago
  I have substantial usage via their API using LibreChat and have never run into rate limits. Why not just use that?
  - yarbas89 2y ago
    That sounds more expensive than the £18/mo Claude Pro costs?
    - zaptrem 2y ago
      Yes, but if you want more usage it is reasonable to expect to pay more.
- divan 2y ago
  Same.

eschluntz 2y ago

We are definitely aware of this (and working on it for the web UI), and that's why Claude Code goes directly through the API!

smallerfish 2y ago
I'm sure many of us would gladly pay more to get 3-5x the limit. And I'm also sure that you're working on it, but some kind of auto-summarization of facts to reduce the context in order to avoid penalizing long threads would be sweet. I don't know if your internal users are dogfooding the product that has user limits, so you may not have had this feedback - it makes me irritable/stressed to know that I'm running up close to the limit without having gotten to the bottom of a bug. I don't think stress response in your users is a desirable thing :).
- stribbon 2y ago
  [flagged]
- justinbaker84 2y ago
  This is the main point I always want to communicate to the teams building foundation models. A lot of people just want the ability to pay more in order to get more. I would gladly pay 10x more to get relatively modest increases in performance. That is how important the intelligence is.
  - willsmith72 2y ago
    As a growth company, they likely would prefer a larger amount of users even with occasional rate limits, vs smaller pool of power users. As long as capacity is an issue, you can't have both
    - cruffle_duffle 2y ago
      If people are paying for use, then why can’t you have both?
      - saulpw 2y ago
        It takes time to grow capacity to meet growing revenue/usage. As parent is saying, if you are in a growth market at time T with capacity X, you would rather have more people using it even if that means they can each use less.
        brador 2y ago
        If you can’t scale with your customer base fire your CTO.
sealthedeal 2y ago
I haven't been able to find ClaudeCLI for pubic access yet. Would love to use.
- eschluntz 2y ago
  >>> npm install -g @anthropic-ai/claude-code >>> claude
- kkarpkkarp 2y ago
  see https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-code/overview https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-c...
raylad 2y ago
The problem with the API is that it, as it says in the documentation, could cost $100/hr. I would pay $50/mo or something to be able to have reasonable use of Claude Code in a limited (but not as limited) way as through the web UI, but all of these coding tools seem to work only with the API and are therefore either too expensive or too limited.
- rudedogg 2y ago
  > The problem with the API is that it, as it says in the documentation, could cost $100/hr. I've used https://github.com/cline/cline https://github.com/cline/cline to get a similar workflow to their Claude Code demo, and yes it's amazing how quickly the token counts add up. Claude seems to have capacity issues so I'm guessing they decided to charge a premium for what they can serve up. +1 on the too expensive or too limited sentiment. I subscribed to Claude for quite a while but got frustrated the few times I would use it heavily I'd get stuck due to the rate limits. I could stomach a $20-$50 subscription for something like 3.7 that I could use a lot when coding, and not worry about hitting limits (or I suspect being pushed on to a quantized/smaller model when used too much).
  - jasonjmcghee 2y ago
    Claude Code does caching well fwiw. Looking my costs after a few code sessions (totaling $6 or so) the vast majority is cache read, which is great to see. Without caching it'd be wildly more expensive. Like $5+ was cache read ($0.05/token vs $3/token) so it would have cost $300+

clangfan 2y ago

this is also my problem, ive only used the UI with $20 subscription, can I use the same subscription to use the cli? I'm afraid its like those aws api billing where there is no limit to how much I can use then get a surprise bill

eschluntz 2y ago
It is API billing like AWS - you pay for what you use. Every time you exit a session we print the cost, and in the middle of a session you can do /cost to see your cost so far that session! You can track costs in a few ways and set spend limits to avoid surprises: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-code/overview#manage-costs-effectively https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/agents-and-tools/claude-c...
- mindok 2y ago
  Which is theoretically great, but if anyone can get an Aussie credit card to work, please let me know.
  - robbiep 2y ago
    I haven’t had an issue with Aussie cards? But I still hit limits, I use Claudemind with jetbrains stuff and there is a max of input tokens (j believe), I am ‘tier 2’ but doesn’t look like I can go past this without an enterprise agreement
  - zzygan 2y ago
    No issue with AU credit card here. Is a credit card and not a debit card though
- danw1979 2y ago
  What I really want (as a current Pro subscriber) is a subscription tier ("Ultimate" at ~$120/month ?) that gives me priority access to the usual chat interface, but _also_ a bunch of API credits that would ensure Claude and I can code together for most of the average working month (reasonable estimate would be 4 hours a day, 15 days a month). i.e I'd like my chat and API usage to be all included under a flat-rate subscription. Currenty Pro doesn't give me any API credits to use with coding assistants (Claude Code included ?) which is completely disjointed. And I need to be a business to use the API still ? Honestly, Claude is so good, just please take my money and make it easy to do the above !

punkpeye 2y ago

If you are open to alternatives, try https://glama.ai/gateway https://glama.ai/gateway We currently serve ~10bn tokens per day (across all models). OpenAI compatible API. No rate limits. Built in logging and tracing. I work with LLMs every day, so I am always on top of adding models. 3.7 is also already available. https://glama.ai/models/claude-3-7-sonnet-20250219 https://glama.ai/models/claude-3-7-sonnet-20250219 The gateway is integrated directly into our chat (https://glama.ai/chat https://glama.ai/chat). So you can use most of the things that you are used to having with Claude. And if anything is missing, just let me know and I will prioritize it. If you check our Discord, I have a decent track record of being receptive to feedback and quickly turning around features. Long term, Glama's focus is predominantly on MCPs, but chat, gateway and LLM routing is integral to the greater vision. I would love feedback if you are going to give a try frank@glama.ai

airstrike 2y ago
The issue isn't API limits, but web UI limits. We can always get around the web interface's limits by using the claude API directly but then you need to have some other interface...
- punkpeye 2y ago
  The API still has limits. Even if you are on the highest tier, you will quickly run into those limits when using coding assistants. The value proposition of Glama is that it combines UI and API. While everyone focuses on either one or the other, I've been splitting my time equally working on both. Glama UI would not win against Anthropic if we were to compare them by the number of features. However, the components that I developed were created with craft and love. You have access to: * Switch models between OpenAI/Anthropic, etc. * Side-by-side conversations * Full-text search of all your conversations * Integration of LaTeX, Mermaid, rich-text editing * Vision (uploading images) * Response personalizations * MCP * Every action has a shortcut via cmd+k (ctrl+k)
  - airstrike 2y ago
    Ok, but that's not the issue the parent was mentioning. I've never hit API limits but, like the original comment mentioned, I too constantly hit the web interface limits particularly when discussing relatively large modules.

mianos 2y ago

I paid for it for a while, but I kept running out of usage limits right in the middle of work every day. I'd end up pasting the context into ChatGPT to continue. It was so frustrating, especially because I really liked it and used it a lot. It became such an anti-pattern that I stopped paying. Now, when people ask me which one to use, I always say I like Claude more than others, but I don’t recommend using it in a professional setting.

zaptrem 2y ago
I have substantial usage via their API using LibreChat and have never run into rate limits. Why not just use that?
- yarbas89 2y ago
  That sounds more expensive than the £18/mo Claude Pro costs?
  - zaptrem 2y ago
    Yes, but if you want more usage it is reasonable to expect to pay more.
divan 2y ago
Same.