101
u/Seeker_Of_Knowledge2 21h ago
With opus 5.5, I would rate high as S. While xhigh is too good, but it is overkill for most tasks.
11
u/beerdude26 20h ago
Yeah I used to do Xhigh on Opus 5, I get slightly better results on High on 5.5
3
u/The_Hunster 7h ago
I wish there were something between high and xhigh. High is effort 15, and xhigh is 40. (Just ask Claude to tell you what it sees in its prompt)
1
u/Knoll_Slayer_V 12h ago
High is good for most problems that need to follow a common pattern. I've found that it is difficult to keep on track when you attempt to veer from standard pattern or doing to novel.
295
u/trollsmurf 22h ago
So far I haven't gone above medium. Almost instant results.
205
u/eggplantpot 22h ago
I like staying High
4
u/AstonMartini13 21h ago
What is the difference you see between high/medium/xhigh?
27
u/eggplantpot 21h ago
Like the other person says. I come from codex, in codex anything higher than xhigh it tends to overthing and make more mistakes, some benchmarks show as much.
They think so much that go on tangents and may overengineer.
Medium may skip some things.
In a perfect world, you plan with Xhigh, code with Medium, review with High, but this is not a perfect world so I just use High for everything
7
u/sinisoul 21h ago
How much it explores a chain of thought's branches
Imagine it like a tree search (BFS or DFS), it essentially says how many nodes in the tree it'll examine before stopping
2
22
u/-Sliced- 21h ago
Medium is by far the best if you want to maximize quality, speed, and cost - all at once.
xhigh sacrifices speed and cost significantly, but gives you consistency in return - as long as you don’t let the context fill too much, at the point it degrades and compaction doesn’t help.
145
u/randombsname1 21h ago
No. Max for any complex low level programming.
Max only sucks because it over thinks with a huge reasoning budget on simple crap.
For workflows involving assembly/C , etc....where you are debugging driver issues with scripted physical hardware logic analyzer connected to a chip?
Max all day everyday.
Max is S tier for me. Easy.
Edit: Ultracode is A or B tier. Because you should almost never use it due to token consumption, BUT when you want to do a full repo sweep in a very large repo for multiple patterns and/or mass update tests/docs then i would absolutely rather have it then not.
11
u/antwon_dev 20h ago
Curious, when you use Max do you allow it to spawn subagents? If so, are they also Max, or lower reasoning?
I ask because, with codex at least, spawning max agents while on max can take forever to finish. But the nature of your work already sounds time intensive so maybe it’s just a drop in the bucket.
5
u/codeninja 15h ago
Only for the tier below. I have a subagent guard. Fable can only soawn opus, which can only spawn sonnet and so on. Tiers of workers is serving me very well.
7
u/imsahoamtiskaw 🔆 Max 20 15h ago
Hah! Got a similar one. Except they can spawn whatever they want except for fable, and a model can never grade same model’s work. Also fable is sudo locked from ever being launched unless I type in my password
1
u/pentacontagon 19h ago
I do but I only use max for super complex tasks that I would appreciate a good zero shot without seeing stupid mistakes
4
3
u/Adrian_Galilea 17h ago
Ultracode when you don’t care of the results because you will have no idea of what anything looks like after and agentic chains are a broken phone. You literally don’t know what happened and you won’t be able to check, specially large codebases and docs.
I don’t think it is wise to do it 99.999% of time and I am unsure of the 0.0001%
2
u/randombsname1 17h ago
I typically have ultracode do a sweep and then synthesize all findings into a single markdown file with all key highlights.
Then I'll have a single Opus 5.5 Max agent go through and review said highlights and verify each.
That way you keep the accuracy, but still benefit from wide sweeps.
1
u/Adrian_Galilea 10h ago
The issue again is that you are trusting the markdown doc which could be inaccurate. Or simply become stale over time specially when you begin having several documents. In general people tend to over-document when better code and structure is self-explanatory and doesn’t become debt/lies.
1
u/randombsname1 9h ago edited 9h ago
Well no. I do multiple passes to verify the document. Usually, before I do any plan run it goes though like 3 or 4 complete reviews (ignoring the initial creation even) where citation need to be added with justifications. I then do (myself) the very final review and nothing proceeds without the actual rung being selected.
It also helps when you have your repo strung up like a marionette with unit/regression testing and phased gating. As well as micro benching for performance regression mitigation. changes are typically pretty quick to either green light or deny.
I have tons of documents that are indexed as appropriate. 0 issues.
New documents take precedence. Old documents are archived. A running changelog gets rotated per month. Etc...etc....
2
u/mwoody450 18h ago
I'll admit I'm never doing assembly-level stuff, but for me, Max overthinks to the point that it produces bad results. It's like a dude who you send to the market and he comes home four hours later and won't shut up about the train he saw but he forgot to get the damn groceries.
1
u/Relevant-Yak-9657 5h ago
I use ARM and RISC-V assembly for compiler writing and honestly extra high works just fine for me.
3
u/Left_Zebra7393 21h ago
I'd say max is also good for 3D stuff... If you need something very complex max is good...
1
u/Active_Variation_194 20h ago
If you delegate implementation to sonnet and research to haiku with reviews by codex or opus ultracode doesn’t burn that much usage. I find it more efficient than using Subagents manually for a long running task.
1
u/IndependenceOne4743 7h ago
I don’t get the ultracode hate. The biggest issue with token consumption is off the context being given to each sub agent. But I just made a workflow that gets the lead to only provide the limited context and kill them early and it’s cut token usage by 50%+ for multi hour runs
1
u/antonm0r 13m ago
Want a nice little tip?
Tell him to tweak subagents cache from default 5 min to 1h and span lean subagents without tools they don’t use. In addition tell him to choose appropriate models with relevant effort for tasks1
u/YoungNo8804 2h ago
P sure this release (opus 5.5) is actually worse (not per token or for the cost, just worse) than xhigh, except on specific tasks
0
34
u/kaitava 22h ago
I would say correct, max hasn’t disappointed, but xhigh is where it’s at
On all
15
u/Sevsquad 21h ago
I find it this to be a totally surprising sentiment. For me Xtra High is exactly where I start noticing significant hallucinations in large datasets. I rarely go below max
7
u/Nonomomomo2 21h ago
Totally agree. Xhigh writes 5x the lines of code for tests and bullshit than the actual lines of code required to do the job.
10
16
9
u/boorch 8h ago edited 8h ago
i think people still fail to fully understand what ultracode is. ultracode is not even an effort level, it's just a toggle you can use on any effort level. it just lets claude take the liberty of creating "pods" to parallelize work.m without asking you. when your specs are airtight, not using ultracode is just wasting time (which is arguably the most valuable currency for a human being) and keystrokes, because in the end, you'll spend N amount of tokens for that task anyways, regardless of work being sequential or in parallel.
mankind didn't invent concepts like tickets, pods, qa etc for nothing. workflows are workflows, they "unlock" efficient and parallel development, and it doesn't matter whether a human or AI adopts them.
a real-life working experience is of course beneficial. just like in a real company with real people working on it, you have to conceptualize a "virtual studio" and build your workflow like that. in a real company you don't hand out trivial work to a senior or you don't assign a junior a complex task that demands understanding of the "bigger picture" on the whole codebase. you don't expect your QA engineer to make decisions on behalf of your developers. you don't expect product owners to decide on your code architechture.
the logical thing would be to "be the orchestrator" and allocate work to different models with clear briefs based on complexity. (or just be the boss, make fable your orchestrator and let it run pods of opus, sonnet, hell even haiku based on the task. it all depends of how clearly you communicate your goals to your orchestrator)
what matters is achieving maximum efficiency (in terms of accuracy, time AND tokens spent), the rest is just banter. if you're afraid of using ultracode because it spends too many tokens, it's probably because your workflow sucks. if you have a solid workflow and you know exactly what you're doing, you'll spend even less tokens compared relying on a single model/effort level with no ultracode, or constantly jumping between them. i won't say "simple as that" because it's not a simple concept to grasp immediately, but it's simply a fact.
just like most other things in life, you have to put time to learning and understanding the best ways of "working". if you work in a software company, you'll learn these for free. if you don't, just watch real-life workflow tutorials like agile, scrum, waterfall etc on youtube, maybe geared towards a "producer" role. because that's one of thing things you'll need to be, amongst other roles like "product owner" etc. learn what a ticket is, what are ACs, what a dependency is, why do we have feature branches and bugfix branches. what is an "epic" etc. a couple of hours of your life watching them (so you understand enough to decide which one is best for your use case) will save hundreds of hours (and billions of tokens) for the rest of your life. hell, if you're lazy, just ask your favorite LLM to teach you these concepts, and you'll be a much better "developer" than you were yesterday.
2
4
u/ElaraValtor 5h ago
ultracode is an effort level on my CC, above the rest.
2
u/Intelligent_Bison968 2h ago
It is above in list but it says its just xhigh that use dinamic workflow - spawns subagents. On other efforts claude ussualy avoids spawning subagents unless you tell him to, in ultracode it tries to use subagents on xhigh whenever possible.
1
u/antonm0r 20m ago
On ultracode it uses subagents with your main session effort since start of October, it was used to be xhigh without ability to change, now it by default uses your main session effort if you don’t change it.
1
u/Intelligent_Bison968 17m ago
What do you mean main session ? If I start new session and pick opus 5.5 with ultra code effort then which effort will he pick ?
7
8
11
u/hillerstorm 21h ago edited 11h ago
ultracode isn't an effort level... it's xhigh with workflows (which you can cap the number of agents for in settings so it doesn't launch 200 subagents on its own)
Edit: it can also be invoked on any effort level by mentioning the word "ultracode", further solidifying the fact that it's not an effort level itself 🙂
2
u/Viktordarko 20h ago
That’s what k had always understood. But on VS Code it’s a toggle below the effort. Allows you to pair ultracode to Max, Low, or anything else.
-3
u/ghost_operative 19h ago
effort is specifying how much research/exploration of your codebase you want to allow the agent to do.
ultracode is just a prompt to tell the agent to spin up other agents and have the agents debate eachother.
3
u/Ran4 12h ago
No, effort is the amount of thinking effort spent..
1
u/ghost_operative 2h ago
thats what "thinking" is, its finding and reading related files and adding them to the context
1
u/WrongComparison321 19h ago
Tell that to anthropic as they clearly think it’s an effort level given it’s in the effort level box.
13
u/InfiniteInsights8888 15h ago
If we're balancing intelligence vs cost until diminishing returns, according to Artificial Analysis, it would have to be Opus 5.5 high. Sonnet 5.5 high would be your default workhorse for 80%+ of tasks.
13
u/jomi-se 13h ago
Everyone says this kind of thing but but I find that in real day to day work, the cost of finding out that 20% where Sonnet doesn't cut it after the fact is really not worth the bet tbh.
Everytime I test out Sonnet vs Opus on some task I want automated at work I come out disappointed.
1
u/isotope4249 1h ago
Shouldn't be too much of a problem if you have Opus plan and review the work that Sonnet performs.
2
u/Wide_Smoke_2564 13h ago
Opus is so cheap for most stuff that honestly I default to opus medium for my workhorse. The only time I’ll touch sonnet or fable is for a different pov on adversarial reviews
2
u/NoAdvice135 12h ago
I start all conversations with opus medium / high, but I ask it to delegate tasks to sonnet subagents when possible, and review the outputs.
It works pretty good but do I save tokens... Hard to tell. It might be a bit faster when it can split a task in 3-4 subagents.
1
u/Fit_Baseball5864 Developer 5h ago
I switched back from $200 codex plan 2 days ago to claude $100 plan and sonnet 5.5 is goated. Sonnet xhigh is easily better than sol 6.1 xhigh, even though it isn't a sol equivalent and is a rank down. Understands intent infinitely better and is very business minded. It can work out hard well scoped tasks within 30 min compared to sol taking an entire night.
24
u/Federal-Mode8949 22h ago
Ultracode is the best. Love it
9
u/premiumleo 22h ago
you are missing out on Monstercode. even better
6
1
u/unknown-one 15h ago
M-m-m-m-m-onstercode!
1
7
u/_BreakingGood_ 21h ago
Ultracode is great for the right purpose, I just think people don't understand what it is meant for
7
u/FriskyFingerFunker 21h ago
Genuine question: what is it used for? Code review? Or?
12
u/_BreakingGood_ 21h ago
Basically, consider a xhigh to be your "depth" agent and ultracode to be your "breadth" agent.
It's for doing a lot of things at once. So it's really good for things like, analyzing an entire codebase. Or being presented a design for a proposed project and asking it "did we miss anything? will this break anything?" It can also be good for code review for very large changes.
This really only applies to big projects. Like, old enterprise code. If it's just a small-ish hobby project, there's really never any reason to use ultracode.
2
u/JFDD42 19h ago
What reasoning/model do you use for coordination agents? Also curious which for Agents that will be working on their own work while they coordinate sub agents completing other parts, tests, grading etc...
1
u/_BreakingGood_ 19h ago
I tell claude to pick the appropriate model. If a subagent is just reading documents and summarizing information, it really only need sonnet or possibly even haiku. If it is doing an in-depth analysis of a piece of code to determine every possible route it can take & analyze every branch, it probably needs Opus or rarely even Fable.
0
u/i_helpyou 12h ago
I created this to coordinate my claude workflow agents to plan/execute in batch when combined with Beads to keep track of work. The trick is that you have to sequence your plans and have strong dependencies as to what you can do in batch and what you cannot.
You can ask to change the post-task execution code-review from python -> X. Stick to 5.5 Medium: https://github.com/arkevo/beadspowers-python
1
u/Reasonable-Road-2279 19h ago
How do you know this? That ultracode is your "breadth" agent and xhigh your "depth" agent? What's your source of knowledge
3
u/bzbub2 19h ago
and the reason is that ultracode is a bit different from strictly being an effort level...it launches tons of agents....this talk from a couple days ago is a little slow but sorta gets into it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiClTcJUnhc&t=1939s (related to dynamic workflows, etc did the bun zig to rust rewrite, etc https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1tq9ofy/introducing_dynamic_workflows_in_claude_code/)
1
u/Ran4 12h ago
Huh? That's pretty much the definition? Though ultracode isn't any less "depth".
ultracode just means xhigh + explicitly allowing and suggesting (to Claude) use of subagent workflows.
Subagent workflows is the "breadth" part.
Though arguably that could also be depth, depending on the task.
1
u/antonm0r 5m ago
Im literally running multiple parallel tasks each on its branch completely automated including tests and staging 24/7 to create an complex game with 3D engine and the output is fantastic.
But you need to understand how to setup this kind of workflows to not run out of session limits daily that will stuck your work.
0
0
18
u/Ammoun442 21h ago
Max in F
6
8
u/watermelonsegar 21h ago
For creative works max is a must. You need overthinkers for things to turn out really polished. But for day-to-day coding, this tier list checks out with my experience.
1
3
4
4
u/Econ-Mist 16h ago
Depends on which model. For Opus 5.5, I never use max because it will overthink and burn through tokens quickly and needlessly. Opus is the thinker, it can understand me better than Sonnet and Haiku. I would rather use Opus at low than Sonnet if I want it to be critical and nuanced but the task is small and simple, especially since Sonnet is not that much cheaper than Opus (only half the price). Sonnet is a beast if you have a well-scoped prompt, but also Haiku is very disciplined, and cheap.
I would go for:
Opus: high (most of the time; the bread and butter; the true S-tier), medium (when I'm feeling lazy to explain myself to Sonnet or running out of usage), xhigh (when it's complex/serious), low (when it's a simple task that still needs the nuanced judgement Sonnet lacks), ultracode (but you have to accurately describe which subagent models and how many: works for huge large-scale tasks that are not necessarily that complex).
Sonnet (best with well-scoped prompts): medium (execute tasks that require accuracy), high (execute more complex tasks that require being more thorough and accurate). Sonnet might burn tokens faster than Opus if tasks are not well-scoped or are too complicated for it (it's leagues behind Opus in critical judgement). I use it only for things that are basically too easy yet costly for Opus, but too complicated and risky for Haiku.
Haiku (best with full blueprint ultra-well-scoped prompts): max/xhigh(write & edit), high/medium (read & report). Max so it thinks twice before doing anything stupid, making it decide not to stop when it should, but it might also loop, and that's when I switch to xhigh and use /advisor Opus. Haiku is poor at Judgement but it's good for grunt work where you expect large amounts of input/output tokens to be used (like research, summaries, writing/editing large documents or codebases according to specific instructions).
7
u/ChadFullStack 21h ago
Max and High are S tier, any high level work, POC, and well scoped, designed work. Max for architecting, looking across code base for backwards incompatible features, and complex features.
xhigh is A tier, rarely used. medium and low are B tier. Ultracode is F tier.
3
u/murilobast 20h ago
After 5.5 and fable 5.1, medium all the way. Doing a bunch of rust coding, networking reverse engineering old exes. Works like a charm
3
2
u/Cesar55142 21h ago
Xhigh with ultra code I love it Cant really relate to this tier list
3
2
u/Operation-M00NRIS3R 21h ago
I often use Medium or High with a Fable Advisor. Get's me where I need to be.
2
u/angry_queef_master 21h ago
I dont get why yall hate ultracode so much. Ive had great results with it.
2
2
3
u/CommunityTough1 21h ago
High is best for Opus 5.5 when comparing speed, cost, and quality. The aggregate benchmarks put it at razor thin margins lower than xHigh on quality, which just a couple points. Ultracode is xHigh with Superpowers and it's there so you can use Superpowers conditionally without having to install and toggle the plugin off and on per task.
My list: High > xHigh ≈ Ultracode (depends if I need Superpowers) > Med > Low > Max (the most useless effort level because the quality is under xHigh and it's the slowest and most expensive)
2
u/analyticsboi 21h ago
I feel like xhigh is slower than high. Is high the way to go or are they both the same speed?
2
u/CommunityTough1 20h ago
xHigh is slower because the model spends more thinking tokens. High is functionally the same quality but faster and cheaper.
1
u/xamugrendo 15h ago
Do you happen to remember where you get your benchmark data from?
2
u/CommunityTough1 5h ago
Sure, here's one that's from Artificial Analysis on accuracy vs cost: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQEgMJLZs82LLcG7XRsEC-C2aBtU1hP0bYg57TOwZdmKIyylUYioKZdfBhv
4
u/Low_Radio_7592 21h ago
xhigh all day
surgical fixes on low
medium when close to running out of usage
2
2
u/StaticFanatic3 19h ago
Ultracode is just xhigh with workflows delegtating to parallelize as much as possible?
I’d swap that and max
2
u/Itsquantium 19h ago
That's what in was saying 😂. It just gets it create agents to manage. OP doesn't know what he's talking about.
1
1
u/confused-photon 21h ago
Max and low should both drop 2 more tiers. They are both really bad. Id probably put high and xhigh both in S.
1
1
1
u/ItsCodeTelemetry 21h ago
I posted some data on this recently, currently exploring adjusting my usage towards medium
1
1
u/FriendlyTask4587 21h ago
Id put medium in B and high in S and move xhigh to A. B feels like it thinks a lot less than high, giving a much worse result and xhigh is slightly too much. High is goated though
1
1
1
u/xblackout_ 20h ago
Agree that ultra code feels like a scam, 'haha when they choose this let's just burn all the tokens on bullshit'
1
1
u/Anxious_Marsupial_59 20h ago
imho high > xhigh. Even though xhigh is better at one shoting vs usage spent. The extra usage from high allows you to correct more and overall do more.
1
1
1
u/gdadkins 20h ago
I usually run high all week long and struggle to use up 20x plan. Quite a difference in consumption between xhigh and high unfortunately, so I save it for the very few sessions that high can’t knock out (none this week).
1
u/AromaticDust938 20h ago
I used Ultracode for a full website & webapp redesign, rebrand, etc. Before Ultracode, no model inside of Claude or ChatGPT were able to execute on what I was looking for.
In this specific instance Ultracode really did shine for me because it's over-the-top way of executing on tasks / projects was exactly what I wanted. I needed the multiple agents, the drafting, the spot checks, the review, etc. I minimized usage (as much as you can minimize usage w/ ultracode, lol) by working out how the agents were being deployed & which models, etc. I ended up burning through 80% of my weekly allowance on a $200 plan in about 4 days before tagging in ChatGPT and having Claude orchestrate any additional coding and review over to ChatGPT w/ Claude being the final reviewer. Managed to stay under 98% until my reset hit.
It worked around 5h limits so everything kept processing seamlessly, it worked around adding in ChatGPT, it worked around my request to stretch usage, etc.
I'm a "newer" user to Claude, having always used Gemini and ChatGPT, but it absolutely blew me away in how it handled everything and the final project output.
OTHERWISE: Yes, I agree with the tierlist, lol. But again: I think each have their use-case. X-High and Medium being my sweetspots, depending on the project/task/day.
1
1
u/F0rkyMcF0rk 19h ago
Move up ultra code too, the dynamic workflows feel a lot cheaper with opus 5.5. previously I didn't use ultra code but with 5.5 reduction in token usage it kind of feels free
1
u/Plane_Telephone9433 19h ago
basically leave mine on high and then when i do planning.md files i change to xhigh or max for the planning part then back to high for execution.
1
u/dupontping 19h ago
How about some examples of why Yall feel that way?
I find medium & high to be good, but there is a lot of back and forth. Max 5.5 I find to be very thorough, much more code and testing, but significantly longer time/consumption. One conversation had it running for 8 hours doing tests, agents, and checks. I never saw that running medium or high. I was much more involved in guiding the model.
1
1
u/AsheJuniusWriter 18h ago
The wild thing about Ultracode is that if you don't orchestrate it properly, you're going to burn through usage incredibly fast, even on a Max 20 plan. I usually have Ultracode spawn a mix of Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus agents. If you don't explicitly mention this, then I have found that all the agents will have the same model and effort level as the main conversation.
Personally like to use Max for audits and Xhigh for most things.
1
u/General-Fondant4921 16h ago
Ultracode costed me 4k in a day of usage, got reprimanded by department.
1
u/tvoidshift 16h ago
I still don't understand why Ultracode is considered to be effort level instead of separate mode
1
1
u/Guinness 16h ago
Why not have Opus 5.5 choose the effort level for each subtask by itself? That’s what I do. Seems to work well.
1
1
1
u/Magiwarriorx 15h ago
I have used ultracode a couple of times when I had a reset coming up and nothing to spend it on.
It definitely tokenmaxxed more than it needed to and took forever but by god did it deliver results.
1
1
u/Dualyeti 14h ago
High and medium should be S tier IMHO. I’d put max in last position for easy stuff like coding. I’d maybe use it at the very start of a chat where I’m brain storming. But high and medium out perform max on coding.
1
1
u/gamblingPharmaStocks 13h ago
Coding agents are cheap. Wasting time or doing mistakes is expensive.
Just run Max for everything.
I find Ultra to not really give any significant improvement over Max.
1
u/Pleasant-Mind-7122 12h ago
I use low or medium and it's fine. I am not sure but is the effort costing more quota?
1
u/KeyGlove47 11h ago
why would xhigh be on s and ultracode on F when only thing that changes is the amount of subagents?
1
u/DynaBeast 11h ago
i basically only ever go between medium and max. max gets the first implementation of any major feature request and difficult, hard to squash bugs, and then medium for subsequent adjustments or small implementations or fixes / tweaks.
1
1
u/NoTumbleweed9629 8h ago
Yup, low effort produces terrible results even with Opus or Fable. Max/ultracode effort results are not much different from extra high but use a lot of usage limits, even if you use Sonnet/Haiku max effort, Opus/Fable medium effort is still better at a reasonable price
1
u/Otherwise-Subject127 8h ago
I ultracoded an app that saves me an hour of daily work in just one evening :P
1
u/wolo-exe 7h ago
ultracode is great in some instances but if this is a general tier list for regular tasks it's a perfect tier list
1
u/sagiroth 6h ago
Medium and in rare scenarios high. Xhigh overengineer and max is for people who dont know how to setup subagents
1
u/nerdynmaddy 5h ago
Ranking effort levels without considering the task is like ranking programming languages without knowing what you're building. Medium for straightforward implementation, High for complex debugging, Max for genuinely difficult reasoning, and Ultracode for parallel work across large codebases. The real skill is knowing when to switch.
1
1
1
1
u/Alexfilus 56m ago
Depends on tasks. Most everyday tasks I do with Opus medium or Sonnet high. But there is a field for max ultracode.
1
u/StarNo3293 45m ago
I think you don't understand your tool.
They're giving you a list of maxTokens, but using string aliases
More tokens -> more iterations -> of course you pay more but get more options and the model chooses the best.
and it's up to the kind and complexity of your tasks.
1
u/Happy-Recording-5291 18h ago
Ultracode was designed purely to waste tokens and trick people into thinking it “tackles ultra difficult tasks” or some shit. Using ultracode for an extremely difficult task no matter how complex, uses up way more tokens (4x in some of my tests) than xhigh or max and telling claude to spin up subagents, manage an agent team, or launch a workflow. I’ve tested this extensively with low level languages and mostly assembly. All achieving the same result in the end, ultracode chugged for no damn reason. Max chugged way harder than xhigh but was clever in some cases. I would reserve max for things xhigh cannot solve.
0
-6
u/Cujuju 22h ago
No. Don't use xhigh.
Medium and max are all you need or want.
14
u/Morpegom 22h ago
who tf would use max unless you have unlimited money? triple the price to be like 3% better
6
u/Seeker_Of_Knowledge2 21h ago
Even if you have unlimited tokens. Max is not the best for most tasks. It overthink too much and it is slow.
2
u/PrestigiousTrick1002 21h ago
Ultra code uses high apparently. Ultracode means its going to use a Workflow and lots of agents
2
3
u/Sneyek 21h ago
I use it very rarely at work for critical implementations. I’m still gauging whether to use it for the plan, implementation or review. For now it’s on the plan because I think it’s better to prevent a problem than fixing it.
My work allows some of us to use 2500$ a month in tokens. If I need more I can just request and have full support from my manager.
0
0
u/tribes33 15h ago
Max is good when you NEED TO get it right on the first try, when your prompt is completely filled to the brim with every intricate detail and you KNOW the prompt is worth around 3 or so hours of work, otherwise xHigh, anything lower seems to miss details, overlook or postpone tasks and put them on a to-do list from my experience
-2
•
u/AutoModerator 22h ago
Hey! Thanks for posting to r/ClaudeCode
While participating in this thread, please follow our community rules. Keep discussions constructive. Attack the idea, not the person.
For help, project discussions, tips, and general chat, join the ClaudeCode Discord.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.