Ask HN: What default model do you use and why?

2 points by stikit ↗ HN
I use claude for most of what I do, and Fable is largely overkill for me and frequently burns through my Max plan's session credits in minutes (!) when just doing an initial mobile app planning with 4 agents. After I waited out the timeout period 6 hours later, and I picked up again, the cache had timed out so it burned through 2% of the session in less than a minute. Opus 4.8 is now my goto and I will be avoiding 5 until I see a reason to switch back. 4.8 is 'good enough' for what I need and has been a great value. It mostly gets things right. Most of what I do is web and mobile , largely cloud backend.

102 comments

[ 0.29 ms ] story [ 12.6 ms ] thread
I have an 'ask' alias in my shell that just uses Haiku. I use it daily for pretty much everything

For more long work, I now use Fable to create a PLAN.md. I tell it to make a plan that will be executed by other models, and most of the time it ends up choosing Opus or Sonnet for the actual work.

I didn't start doing this recently. Before that, I would just use the top model for everything. Splitting the work across different models depending on the task has helped a lot. They run faster, and I usually get better results

mimo-v2.5-free, mimo-v2.5, deepseek-flash in that order, honestly don’t even bother using qwen3.6-35b-a3b now unless i need uncensored tasks finished, mostly reverse engineering

most engineering tasks don’t require frontier llms

when they get stuck, then i consider moving up to more capable models

purchasing a claude plan seems widely unnecessary to me

the tasks they do better than the average engineer cut both ways: unless you have an existing portfolio of well written and designed work done pre-llms, it looks like you’re producing slop that pretends to be well designed

poor typography choices despite using the mode,

poor layout choices despite using popular CSS frameworks

etc

bad engineers will always be bad engineers

tools don’t make up for it

edit: a follow up to this— everyone is using eyebrows in their layouts and have no fucking clue why it was done to begin with

everyone has a status pill floating above their front page hero display text and its not fucking status related

so gross

Astra low for pretty much everything gets me through the work week with a bit to spare on the 5x max plan.
I've found good success with the new Gemini models on Antigravity. Granted I use my models either:

- like a fancy auto complete (here are some stub methods, they should do X, fill them in)

- using fairly detailed plans and test harnesses, so blowing up the world is hard

The 3.X Flash family have been fairly capable models, and the selling point for me is just raw speed. Gemini is noticeably faster than the competition, about 3-4x, and I just get work done faster with it.

That said I'm keeping an eye on Open Weights. DS4 Flash was good until price hikes, and finding a provider that serves at high speed and without quantisation at the prior price is tricky.

Same. I have a promo plan that's currently $3/month, which gets you a model that's almost opus, very fast speeds, and very generous limits.

There's no Gemini pro model currently, so you gotta pair that with a 20 openai plan for access to more advanced stuff if you need it.

Oh for sure. But latest Gemini has been pretty good for even tricky things. I got it to reverse engineer the Bowers Wilkins foundation app so I can queue music over WiFi from my laptop instead of my phone (without AirPlay 2 compression or a Roon subscription).

A few months ago that would've been bigger model stuff, but now you can do that in a couple hours with Flash and direction.

Claude, not necessarily because it's better. I find deepseek flash to be of similar quality. But because it's so heavily subsidized.
I think for me stuff peaked around Opus 4.7, I was leaning heavily on the model with paired supervision from reviewing the output manually every step of the way. Ever since that things got a little more complicated and in an unsustainable pace for me, I am trying to remove myself from the equation and build verifiable and reliable tests with quick feedback loops that let frontier models run autonomously but in all honesty not seeing it scale well, I need to take a step back and reassess if the trade off was worthwhile. Frontier models are being incredible at making me feel like they passed my tests only to eventually reveal some tech debt that forces me to take large pivots. It seems the speed is sexy but the results are questionable, models may have hit a limit in my workflow and I think harness engineering is more important than anything. Would love to hear feedback on this take and if others have experienced similar things and what they did to overcome this. (Context would be solo founder bootstrapping greenfield work with full autonomy and sometimes more room for rapid iteration)
- Default: Codex with Terra Max (because it's crazy cheap)

- Preferred: Claude Code with Opus 5 Medium

Qwen 3.8 flash-next or Gemma 26B because I care about responsible and sustainable usage of LLM's.
Glm-5.3-flash for me. I like faster models because I stay involved all the way through. I don't delegate full control to the agent because it's harder to understand the end result that way.
I used to main Claude, but I can't stand how it writes. I feel like I'm wasting too much time trying to decipher the output. Adding writing rules does not seem to work. Now I use GPT 5.6 Terra high fast mode, with Luna for everything else. I might consider using Sol for planning. I can't stand using Sol or smarter models for coding, because they will eventually try to rewrite everything in the codebase.

I also don't want to use the Claude Code and Codex agent harnesses. The good thing with Codex subscription is that it can be used in other harnesses, unlike Claude. As far as I know, only Anthropic has this restriction.

I recently switched over to GPT from Claude once my subscription lapsed, it's too early to tell, but I do appreciate how more straight to the point Sol 5.6 seems to be, vs. the insane wordslop machine Opus tends to be.

It's really strange because when Opus 5 released, there were some that pointed this out, but a bunch simply said it was the best and as good as Fable etc etc.

but for me, it caused me to get very demotivated and avoid interacting with the model, at least when using Claude Code.

Me too. Claude Opus 5's English is insufferable. Opus 4.6-4.8 was more reasonable.

I've moved to Codex 5.6-Sol. Much saner English, much better at execution, and gets stuff done in a matter-of-factly kind of way (Claude Code is a mess these days -- it gets things wrong and goes around in circles).

But I'm harness agnostic and am not locked in. I just keep my issues in Kata Tracker (https://www.katatracker.com/) and switch harnesses/model when I need to.

Being loyal to a particular model/harness seem unwise to me.

> Me too. Claude Opus 5's English is insufferable. Opus 4.6-4.8 was more reasonable.

I suspect this degradation is happening because the AI labs are using the LLM's output to feedback into the input, to create a thinking loop, and they're optimizing that.

Funny enough, about 8 months ago I switched to Claude mainly because of MCP.

Now I’ve gone back to Codex because I simply find the ChatGPT models much more comfortable to work with. I spend less time fighting the model, correcting its direction, or re-explaining what I meant.

I'm using a lot of gpt-5.6-Luna and glm-5.3-flash. Astra is really fantastic but it's too expensive. I average about 50-90B/tok/mo.
Muse Spark 1.3 Contribs

unbeatable price/intel ratio per M tokens:

$0.10 (input)

$0.20 (output)

$0.002 (cached-input)

I was using various open weights models until glm-5.3-flash came out recently. It's incredibly capable and cheap, even if it's very verbose and not the fastest. I've assigned it to all my agents across my harness and it's getting the job done. Still needs a good steer every now and then, but a great work horse.
I use gemma 4 12B and Qwen 3.8 9B
Sol High-Xhigh, and Opus 5.

Granted, yesterday I threw a few tasks to Astra which the former 2 botches; it produced clean, correct solutions quickly, so pending further eval, this may take over.

IMO unless it's a mechanical tasks, it's worth it to use carefully -crafted queries on the more expensive models, than iterate through messier solutions on the cheaper ones.

I use Sonnit for my personal work and Opus for my professional work.

For my personal stuff, I'm on a small $20 plan, so I need to use tokens conservatively. I was very rarely exceeding limits until I built a Dark Software Factory. It's not as efficient at token use. So, I use Sonnit over Opus here.

At work I have a $100 plan that I rarely exceed so I use Opus. I have access to Fable too, and I did use it a lot while it was new, but I don't find it improves most of my work by too much. I do mostly bug fixing across several hundred repositories with hundreds of thousands of lines of code, mostly written by humans over the past 20-years.

I also use Sol as a secondary for my personal work. I pay for it because I like to talk to ChatGPT. Since I already have the subscription, I let Sol write plans for me. It does a better job at certain tasks and it saves me some Claude tokens. Maybe I should consider Terra for the task, but I don't run up against my usage limits for the little bit I use it.

GLM5.3 - I'm on one of the ancient plans, meaning basically unlimited.

...and then sprinkle in some other models when i think a second opinion will help

I like AI more on the short leash, giving it specific agents tasks, one at a time (centaur mode). I found GPT 5.6 LUNA to be astonishingly capable. Plus, it so fast, that it does not block my flow of throughts, like the more capable but slower models often do. And it is so cheap that I do not use Ollama local models anymore. Luna is far more capable, and so cheap that the energy prices here in Germany eat the gains of local hosting ;-)
Reading through this thread, I notice not many people are using models from the Chinese AI labs ...
My current vibe/playing around setup is deepseek v4.1 flash with opus/sol as advisor agent, dsv4.1flash agents for self review and final review with opus/sol. I love how fast and cheap deepseek is. Using omp as harness.

Privacy policy is not great with deepseek api, but you are always just trusting their word with any hosted llm and in theory i could at least self host the models i use from deepseek.

If I had to pick just one, these days it’s Composer. It is just a cheap, fast, surgical workhorse. My workflow uses other models as well for various phases: Opus for planning, Sonnet for review, etc.

I prefer Cursor at this point just because of Composer. Claude Code is passable but the lack of a good, fast, cheap workhorse sucks. Sonnet and Haiku aren’t it.

I also do like Codex and Sol, Terra, and Luna. They are decent but I don’t find they stand out enough to use over the others.

Additionally, I have not tried Astra and found Fable to really not worth the cost for the tasks I do.

Finally, the latest Grok is actually a beast of a model, but expensive enough to not be a stand out.

ZAI/GLM because a friend has generously shared an API key. They have other subscriptions and also a lot more from their employer.

A day ago I activated Google AI Pro free via Google's tie-up with a local company (I do pay for this company's product though and it's anything but costly). Now I will use this too.

No other reasons to pick these, or not picking anything else.

Gemini is the least stupid/most neurotypical model family IMHO. Works great for me
I feel like the odd man out ITT but Terra has been absolutely amazing for me and totally blows Sonnet out of the water. My company pays for Claude so I use Sonnet in the office but at home I use Terra and I find it far more likely to one shot some very decent code.
Glm 5.3 Flash and DeepSeek 4.1 Flash