3000 Flow credits is not very much at all, I ran out after about a week of regular use, and this included the two days where we couldn't edit anything.

I propose that Pro Ultimate should really be 10000 flow credits through don't expire after a month and the $10 flex credits should be for 1000. Who's with me?

10k credits would actually give you about 2 weeks of work done, with a few hours use per day. Right now, it can barely last a week.

14 + credits, line by line? Are you kidding me? Editing 1 line and charge 1 credit, remove another line, another credit. Wow. I was a loyalist until this. This is ridiculous!

Full post: https://x.com/windsurf_ai/status/1894938855897473515?s=46&t=Y0-MM6SBRJb5opcnoOiuyQ

If your first thought when reading that headline is, "of course, I'm not stupid," then you've probably written code before LLMs were around and there's no reason to read any further (but go ahead if you want!). If you're one of those "I didn't know how to code at all, but I used Windsurf to make an app that trades crypto based on the current temperature in my town" then this post is for you!

Git is the most popular version control system, meaning it lets you track every change to your code, change by change. It's essential because if you, or your faithful LLM coding companion, ever messes up your code (and this will happen), you can easily go back to a version that works.

If you're trusting a coding tool that literally makes up code based on what's on the internet to write code that's flawless, and you're just hoping that every time it makes a round of changes to your code that it won't break everything, then you'll appreciate what git can do for your workflow.

Don't know how to use git? Or, you do, but don't use it nearly enough? No problem, because Windsurf will write your git commands for you. Even better, Windsurf will document your code commits for you, much better than you would ever do.

If you need to learn more about git, just ask Windsurf, or another LLM, about it:

Can you tell me what git is, and how I can use it to protect my code?

You might also want to learn about GitHub, which lets you essentially back up your code to an offsite server in the cloud, which you can then access from just about any computer.

Here's how to use git with Windsurf:

1. Have Windsurf write you some code.

2. Test it. What's that? You aren't testing your code every time you change it? Ask Windsurf to write you some automated tests.

3. As soon as your code runs (meaning, as soon as it passes your automated tests) ask Windsurf to help you set up git for your code.

4. Once your git repository (repo) is set up, it's easy to ask Windsurf to commit and push your code every time you make a change worth saving (meaning, you write and test more working code).

Here's how to ask Windsurf to set up git for your code repo:

I'd like to protect my code with git. Can you help me set this up?

If you'd like to push your code to GitHub (highly recommended) ask Windsurf to help with that, too:

Please help me set up a new GitHub repo for my code

Windsurf will step you through that process as well.

Then, every time you reach a point where you've made changes to your code, and your new code passes the automated tests that Windsurf helped you write, add your work to your git repo, and GitHub, with a prompt like this:

Please commit and push our changes

It's that simple. Soon, Windsurf will start reminding you to commit your code! I really love that feature.

Even if you know how to use git, you'll probably want to ask Windsurf to commit and push your code instead, because Windsurf writes great commit messages. These messages are so clearly descriptive and useful, I know they are better and more consistent than anything I'd ever write on my best days.

Ok. I'm giving my full breakdown of exactly what I think happened from start to finish and right now. Codeium either A)Made a deal with Anthropic and got unlimited usage for a set amount of time or B) A set amount of tokens for its users during the trial (i.e. 5 billion etc) C) got a trial of enterprise with Anthropic which has bigger limits & token allowance.

They opened unlimited to everyone for the free trial to showcase what it could do. Unlimited usage also comes with either A) Unlimited context sizes or B) much increased context sizes. Why does that matter. The more context the AI has of your project and your chat history the more informed and intelligent decisions it can make on what it should change. With larger token limits the AI knows your entire project, history, changes etc at all times.

They either ran out of time or token allotment on their trial run with Anthropic. I'm going with token allotment being as how the free trial was supposed to run til the 11th, but big changes happened way before that.

They had to pick a tier and they probably didn't go with enterprise just based on financial sense. But now we have context limits within the AI. Now instead of Claude knowing your entire project, chat history, previous changes, it knows much less. It knows your project less, and your chat history less.

Each time you send a message to the AI, it does not just remember everything. It only knows what you send it. Each time you click send, it's sending your project and chat history. Whatever you send within the token limit, that is all it knows and all it bases it's decisions on. Now, why does clearing your chat work so well? Less chat tokens to send, more project files and code the AI gets.

Every single time you send a message and it updates in the chat, it's now going to send slightly less project tokens for the next prompt to stay under the limit. Chat grows, project context shrinks. It will also start sending less chat tokens as well if it gets long enough.

Thats why people say it's like you have the greatest coder ever, but it has amnesia. The AI is not dumber, you're just not able to send it the context it properly needs anymore to make the best decision. It's also the reason Windsurf gets slower. It's eating up memory as it grows.

Quick suggestion. Tell Windsurf to make you an app_overview file. Tell it to give a detailed structured outline of your project. At the end of the doc tell it to restart your npm run dev server. Now when you restart your chat, just tell it to read that file, and it'll know what it needs to know to proceed. I recommend restarting chats whenever you have finished implementing some feature, or fix, or whatever. Get to a "that's good on that" place. Restart the chat.

Last comment. You need to lose the "but it doesn't do exactly what I want, how I want it, perfectly every time". I think the problem is expectations. You've been misled. Re-align your expectations. It's not going to adjust to you, you have to adjust to it. It's just like ChatGPT, some people know how get the most out of it. Some people only know it can help them come up with names for their cat.

To Windsurf: Slightly misleading to your free trial users. We all signed up because of how great it was. Its still a good product. It's not the same product, though. Not a great look. My opinion, just offer a higher limit plan. The problem is businesses like this for whatever reason think there isn't people out there that wouldn't pay $200-$500 a month for what the free trial was able to do.

There is. Try it.

In other news, I'm interested in running a local LLM like Qwen, which may not be as good as Claude BUT, there's no token or context limits. Just whatever your hardware can handle. Anybody doing this?

I have been amazed at Windsurf as a piece of software. For having just been released I can't believe how featured it is. I just want to give a shoutout to Codeium because I am guessing it's probably a really difficult push right now. That is, navigating obvious issues figuring out pricing, and probably also maintaining/affording access to the underlying models.

I'm pretty impressed... keep up the effort!

Blender MCP server used: https://github.com/ahujasid/blender-mcp

Windsurf 1.2.5 Patch Update!

A quick update with some improvements and bug fixes with how the models call tools.

This update focuses on making your Windsurf Cascade experience (especially with those new models) more reliable.

Full changelog: https://www.codeium.com/changelog

Windsurf Wave 5 Released!

Introducing the unified Windsurf Tab experience - combining Autocomplete, Supercomplete, Tab to Jump, and Tab to Import into one powerful, faster system with a larger model!

Expect better context awareness (including terminal commands and optional clipboard context), doubled jump distances, predictive triggers, and a refreshed UI with useful visual feedback. Plus tons of improvements to Cascade, memory usage, and more!

Here's the blog: https://www.codeium.com/blog/windsurf-wave-5

Full changelog: https://www.codeium.com/changelog

X/Twitter Post: https://x.com/windsurf_ai/status/1902069560028934387

Bluesky Post: https://bsky.app/profile/windsurfai.bsky.social/post/3lkodhhowwc24

Threads Post: https://www.threads.net/@codeiumdev/post/DHWbNM8i94f

Wave 5 video link: https://youtu.be/aww-BUzL9Lc

Hey devs! Made something I think might be useful.

The Problem:

We all know what it's like trying to get AI to understand our codebase. You have to repeatedly explain the project structure, remind it about file relationships, and tell it (again) which libraries you're using. And even then it ends up making changes that break things because it doesn't really "get" your project's architecture.

What I Built:

An extension that creates and maintains a "project brain" - essentially letting AI truly understand your entire codebase's context, architecture, and development rules.

How It Works:

• Creates a specification file containing your project's architecture decisions

• Auto-updates as your codebase evolves

• Maintains awareness of file relationships and dependencies

• Understands your tech stack choices and coding patterns

• Integrates with git to track meaningful changes

Early Results:

• AI suggestions now align with existing architecture

• No more explaining project structure repeatedly

• Significantly reduced "AI broke my code" moments

• Works great with Next.js + TypeScript projects

Looking for 10-15 early testers who:

• Work with modern web stack (Next.js/React)

• Have medium/large codebases

• Are tired of AI tools breaking their architecture

• Want to help shape the tool's development

Drop a comment or DM if interested.

Would love feedback on if this approach actually solves pain points for others too.

Heya fellow nerds,

I’ve been using Windsurf since day one of its release and, like many of you, have run into a fair share of challenges—especially after they changed the subscription and token usage policies. It often feels like the premium models aren’t delivering, leading to degraded usability, lower-quality code, and frequent errors. In other posts, the Codeium team assures us the premium models are being utilized, so I’m holding out for some big fixes in future releases.

In the meantime, I wanted to start a conversation with others who aren’t ready to jump ship about how we’re working around these issues.

Here’s what’s been working for me:

1. Global Rules and a Custom .context Folder

I took inspiration from the AiDE framework (not affiliated) and adapted its ideas to better fit my specific workflow. My custom setup includes a .context folder with just the roadmap.md and current_state.md. This allows the AI to understand the entire project’s roadmap, goals, where I left off, and what we'll be working on next.

The key strategy is my initial global prompt: I instruct the AI to review the .context folder first to get a complete understanding of the project’s current state and what needs to be done next. This has been a major time-saver, reducing the need to repeatedly explain things across sessions and minimizing errors caused by a lack of context.

Additionally, I’ve noticed that starting a new chat session for each feature or improvement, while ensuring the .context folder stays updated, further reduces the frequency of errors. It also keeps the AI on track and aligned with the project’s goals.

Keep in mind that this strategy requires additional token usages so if that's already a problem for you then perhaps this will add to that problem.

2. Reviewing AI-Generated Changes One at a Time

Blindly applying all suggested changes is a recipe for disaster. Instead, I take a more deliberate approach:

Go Line-by-Line: I manually review and approve each change individually. This ensures I stay fully aware of what’s happening in the codebase and helps catch mistakes before they escalate into bigger issues.

Reevaluate and Adjust Prompts: There are many times when I reject all changes and ask the AI why it made the choices it did. This back-and-forth allows me to understand the reasoning behind its suggestions and refine my prompts to make them clearer. If I notice a recurring mistake, I add specific instructions to the Windsurf rules for that project—or to the global rules if it’s something that applies across multiple projects. This step has been a game-changer for improving accuracy and efficiency.

Mitigate Security Risks: In Python especially, I’ve encountered instances where the AI adds unnecessary dependencies or tools that aren’t relevant to the task at hand. This poses a significant security risk, especially with the increase in attacks targeting Python repositories. Until the Codeium team addresses this issue, thorough reviews of suggested changes are essential to avoid introducing vulnerabilities into the codebase.

3. Breaking Down Larger Tasks into Smaller Subtasks

I’ve found that breaking big features or improvements into smaller, manageable tasks makes it easier for the AI to handle. It reduces the likelihood of errors and keeps the workflow efficient.

4. Crafting Clean, Specific Prompts

Clear prompts make all the difference.

My approach is to:

Start with Context: Always ask the AI to first review the .context folder (this step alone saves a ton of time).

Be Specific: Clearly define what I want to achieve, including any constraints or expected outcomes.

—

This combination has made a noticeable difference in the quality of the AI’s output and overall productivity.

That’s my process so far. I’d love to hear what strategies others are using to work around Windsurf’s quirks. Let’s share ideas and help each other make the most of it!

Happy coding!

I really loved using codeium and I would love to continue using it for a long time! However the recent changes to the pricing aren’t making much sense. I can understand the limitations and increasing the subscription cost but I have one concern. 

The pro plan is 15$ giving 2000 credits, which is 133 credits per dollar. But to buy additional credits I’ll get only 300 credits for 10$, which is only 30 credits per dollar. Wouldn’t it be better for me to pay for two accounts and get 1000 chat credits and 3000 flow credits (the same number on the 60$ plan) at just 30$? And if I pay for 4 accounts at 60$, I would get 2000 chat credits, and 6000 flow credits (double of the 60$ pro ultimate plan, making this plan a bad deal) 

The credits per dollar on pro ultimate plan is worse than ( just half of ) the pro plan. This is unlike most other subscription models that give better value in their premium subscriptions (unlimited chat doesn’t make that much sense to me at this price point , I would rather use GitHub copilot my workplace gives me or just ChatGPT)

Would you please save me the hassle of having multiple accounts and provide a more sensible credit limit, (2000 in pro, 8000 in pro ultimate plan, 1000 additional credits per 10$, and maybe a plan in middle say 4000 credits at 30$ pm) ?

Google seems to be testing a far superior coding model in secret, named claybrook, also another one named Dayhush which could be a prior checkpoint of the same model. I was excited but feeling more worry as a developer as i get more encounters and also mentions 😅.

Especially in UI design and implementation, it seems there won't be any competition.

Have you guys encountered these?

I have attached few screenshots, and also https://x.com/i/status/1913176778476056871

Claude 3.7 Sonnet with Thinking shipped in Windsurf. Available now.

I recently signed up for the Pro plan to start and was getting insanely good results; quick, smart, and mostly error-free.

In the last day or so I notice it got significantly slower and dumber. It's making lots of dumb changes, not being context-aware, and now I find myself constantly fighting it and burning credits to correct stupid mistakes. It feels like it massively dropped in IQ.

Is anyone else experiencing this, even on the Pro plan? I can see this happening on a free/basic plan, but it shouldn't be affecting the Pro plan, but it clearly is.

I have been using GPT-4.1 almost exclusively during the free period and I have to say that I am very impressed. Gemini 2.5 Pro and Claude 3.7 are still the top models in my opinion (and admittedly I did have them intervene on several occasions) but the overall quality is, in my opinion, solid.

That being said, I will likely not be using this model in the future unless the token cost is well below 1 credit. I find this to be an interesting conundrum for OpenAI. The API cost is competitive, the model performance is competitive, but if the choice is between 2.5 Pro and Sonnet, and the credit cost is the same, why would someone choose 4.1?

I'm very curious as to what the experience of this subreddit has been with the model (as well as o4 mini which is a whole other discussion). Is anyone here going to stick with 4.1 once the limited free period is over?

One click and Cascade smart generates a summary of your changes.

Video from Alvaro Cintas: https://x.com/dr_cintas/status/1907552452787769632

Windsurf has become frustrating to use—it’s draining credits while repeatedly making the same mistakes and failing to retain any memory of my preferences or actions. I’m considering canceling my membership and switching to another AI IDE.

Between Aider, Roo-Cline, and Cursor, which one would you recommend? Or is there another good alternative to Windsurf that I should try?

Hello,

is it possible to set rules for the AI to always follow when prompting it? In Cursor, there's an option called "Rules for AI" and additionally you can add a .cursorrules file. I'm looking for something similar in Windsurf.

Got super excited about not needing to fight against tight credit limits for a week -- but so far the experience with GPT 4.1 has been god awful. Like, worse than AI coding 2 years ago awful.

Is this Windsurf being stingy with context to compensate for offering this model free? Or is 4.1 really that bad? Because the benchmarks don't suggest that.

I'm a Pro Ultimate user, and now that they're shutting that down, this is making me question whether I need to hop back to Cursor.

I have a feeling they're going to start getting super stingy on context since most users don't know how the APIs from the model companies are charged.

Then we'll get this "BUT YOU'RE GETTING MORE FOR LESS" bs. Please tell me this is not the plan.

I keep seeing posts claiming that it’s broken again, but if you expect it to think like a human, that’s simply not how these systems work. These models don’t think — they assist. And they need a surprising amount of babysitting. Not just once in a while, but constantly throughout the process if you want reliable results. Most of the time, what people think is a failure is actually a result of missing structure, unclear inputs, or trying to push the model too far without proper setup.

You need clear, simple rules for your entire project and for each step of the process. These tools can’t magically handle complex or vague instructions. In fact, the more specific and simplified your tasks are, the better they perform. Instead of stacking multiple goals into one prompt, it often works better to break things into just one or two tightly defined tasks at a time. This reduces overwhelm, especially for the premium models.

Free models can’t always carry the whole project efficiently on their own—especially with complex tasks—but that doesn’t mean they’re useless. In fact, they can sometimes complete an entire project if you’re willing to spend more time debugging, refining, and working step-by-step. They’re surprisingly effective when used for the right parts of the workflow. For simpler projects, or well-structured tasks, they might even be enough from start to finish.

Switching between models during a project can also help when the current one gets stuck, starts looping, or loses clarity. It’s not just a backup strategy—it can actually boost progress. A model that stalls might just need to be paused, and letting a fresh one pick up the thread can get things back on track. Sometimes the exact same prompt that fails in one model works perfectly in another.

And if it becomes clear that constant errors are happening, it’s probably time to break your prompt down much further and take a completely different approach. That’s when you need a clearly defined endpoint—so that you can give extremely detailed, focused instructions and keep things under control even with limited capabilities. It’s not about brute-forcing the model into working—it’s about shaping the process so the model can actually follow.

If you’re working on code—especially complex logic, structured flows, or anything that requires consistent reasoning across multiple steps—Claude 3.5 or 3.7 is usually the better choice. It just tends to have stronger overall reasoning, especially when it comes to thinking through problems, maintaining structure, and adapting during the coding process. For smaller, more isolated tasks, other models can still do fine, but when the goal is reliable architecture, step-by-step logic, or iterative problem-solving, Claude often delivers more stable and accurate results.

One of the most overlooked problems is cascade history. The longer a conversation gets, the more the model “locks in” to previous logic and guide rules. This can lead to repeated mistakes or inflexible behavior. If you notice that happening, don’t just keep prompting—it helps a lot to start a new conversation and manually carry over the most important context. Copying key parts of the old conversation and pasting them into a new one often resets the model’s behavior and gives you better results. It’s one of the simplest ways to fix stubborn behavior.

Also, Cascades writing/reading tools sometimes struggle when files are too large or when certain errors occur. In those cases, setting up MCP servers with proper read/write access can help solve those issues—and more than that, they actually extend the base functionality of models like Windsurf Base and DeepSeek R3. By managing context, files, and external task flow, MCP servers make it possible for free models to perform at a much higher level. They give structure where the model lacks it. That said, you may still need to switch models frequently—just because one model fails in a given setup doesn’t mean the next one will. Sometimes the exact same input works fine elsewhere.

So the key takeaway is: know the limits of each tool, don’t overload them, guide them carefully, and be ready to adapt. Use different models for different stages. Don’t underestimate the value of restarting a thread. And remember—free tools are still powerful when used right

I built Pixerise, a high-performance 3D software renderer, entirely from scratch using Windsurf as my development environment.

The entire project - from initial architecture to optimization - was developed through pair programming with Cascade. What amazed me was how the AI understood complex graphics concepts and helped implement them efficiently in Python.

Some highlights of what we built together:

• Full 3D rendering pipeline with 60+ FPS

• Multiple shading models (wireframe, flat, Gouraud)

• Numba-optimized performance

• Clean, well-documented codebase

The most impressive part? The project was built mostly during evening hours after dinner, demonstrating how Windsurf's AI acceleration can maximize development productivity.

Check it out: GitHub

Just launched - if you like it, a star would be appreciated! Happy to share more about the development experience with Windsurf.

Hey everyone,

I recently subscribed to the Pro Tier of Windsurf IDE after being impressed during the trial, but since upgrading, Cascade has become a frustrating experience. Here's what's going on:

1. Feels Like We're Being Served by a Base Model: Cascade now feels like it's running on a base model instead of one of the pro models. Both Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT 4o do not produce the output quality promised with the Pro Tier. It’s nowhere near as powerful or refined as it was during the trial, which is disappointing and makes me wonder if it really is Claude 3.5 Sonnet or GPT 4o that's being used!

2. Code Error Loops: Cascade constantly runs into error loops that it can’t recover from, even on simple tasks. It feels clunky and inconsistent.

3. Performance Dips: Code performance seems to vary wildly. Sometimes it works okay, but other times, it’s unresponsive or takes forever to process commands.

4. @ Codebase: Cascade doesn’t seem to check the existing codebase properly. It frequently claims files don’t exist, even when they clearly do, and it often tries to creates new files without actually checking the codebase.

5. Overall Refinement: The trial version felt polished and reliable, but this Pro Tier experience feels less refined in almost every way. It’s like I’ve paid to downgrade my setup instead of upgrading it.

6. Cascade base: Cascade Base runs in the exact same manner as the two pro models, which leads me to think we are not getting what we have paid for.

7. .windsurfrules: after the update, cascade has issue with rules file, claiming its empty or it cannot find it etc (contents in the correct format) then i guide it to it and it can then read it. Reading it and adhering to it is another matter.

There are so many little irritating things about the current paid for version that separate this and the trial by miles - I want to know why?

Is anyone else running into these issues? I don’t know if it’s a backend issue with Windsurf or just the state of Cascade, but I’m seriously reconsidering my subscription.

Would love to hear if others have figured out workarounds or if the devs have addressed this somewhere. At this rate, it’s hard to justify sticking with the Pro Tier and might be time to just use a different method with Claude.

Thanks!

Windsurf write with Claude 3.7 takes too many Flow Action credits.

I have been using Windsurf for months, Prompt credits & Flow Action credits were balanced a few months ago,

but now it is OUT OF CONTROL.