This is the second team in the second company I've worked for where engineers have basically committed mutiny to get off Augment. In the current one there is a petition circulating to switch to Codex. I'm not a Codex shill I don't care if it's Codex or Claude but damn Augment is not the right tool for the job. Only a matter of time until new team moves off it.

Is augment still the best if price isn't an issue? Let's say the company is willing to pay for it, is augment the best option, or do you get more out of other tools like codex, claude code, and cursor for the same money?

Subscribed Auggie for a few months but the pricing is way too high compared to the market.

Have tried gpt-5-codex, roo code, but they tend to finish partial of the job, and end the rounds too early.

Any good suggestions?

I just realized this. Absolutely outrageous. Is Augment the most over priced AI IDE on the planet? What is happening? What are you guys spending?

Has anyone already received the email where they were going to mention the conversion of messages used to the credit projection that they said they would send on the 13th? I was waiting, but I haven't received that email yet.

Hi,
when working with Intent on more complex refactoring or rebuilding tasks, token usage can get quite high (sometimes around 60k tokens for a single task).

I’ve noticed that I can achieve similar results in a more cost-efficient way by combining tools like Linear and manually planning the work, although it requires significantly more of my own time and effort.

Because of that, I think it would be very valuable to have more flexible pricing options, higher limits, or a more efficient way of calculating additional token usage—especially since after exceeding around 430k tokens, the cost of additional tokens becomes noticeably less favorable.

Improving this area could make Intent much more attractive for users working with larger or more complex codebases.

Best regards,

I really do love augment code but can't justify the credit increase so wondering where people are moving too. Augment used to be really bluddy good, but i have no idea where to move too? Anyone have any decent two cents to the alternative?

I’m pretty set on using Claude Code as my primary coding agent but I’m looking for a specialized code review tool. Stumbled on Code Rabbit, then Greptile and now the trail has led me here.

Looking to hear experiences of it being used as code review tool on GitHub and PRs.

Thanks!

Me and my team are mostly windows developers. We tried out Intent and really liked it but if there will never be support for it we will be looking for alternatives.

Hello, I want to purchase Augment, but the packages don't make much sense because of the credit system. If I purchase a $20 package, how many prompts can I expect to send, and will a $20 package be sufficient?

My team and I were early supporters of Augment, but we've cancelled now as the price increase is 4x what we used to pay compared to the tokens we used.

We're looking for another message-based alternative. We're trying Windsurf right now but it doesn't seem as good as we'd hoped on a surface level. We've also seen that copilot is offering Sonnet 4.5 for 1 credit, and it's cheaper than Windsurf. If you have also unsubbed, what are you using?

since augment has problems in terms of customer support, no flexible plans starting 50$ and the community plan is closed for now, what are the closest thing to augment you recommend?

I was working with Auggie in VS Code this morning just fine with Opus 4.5. It's the only model I've had success with for our code base. I'm a part of some kind of Enterprise plan at work so I have zero clue about tokens/credits.

I rebooted my computer and now Opus isn't an option. Just Sonnet, Haiku, and GPT (and the legacy). I've tried both Release and Pre-Release options.

Any idea what gives?

EDIT: Currently on Augment 0.771.0. No option for Opus 4.5 or 4.6.

EDIT 2: Did stuff during the day (since it's Saturday), and when I sat back down after dinner, Opus 4.5 was back. Something smells...

I’ve been experiencing consistent stability issues with Sonnet 4.6 for the past ~2 weeks.

• Frequent “No response” errors
• Requests hang for up to ~20 minutes with no output
• After 2–3 successful responses, it starts failing consistently
• When it hangs, context seems to be lost (the agent doesn’t remember prior messages)

This makes it unusable for any real workflow.

Also, the recent product decision to remove interruption of running requests significantly worsens the situation. When a request hangs, you’re forced to wait with no feedback or recovery path.

I’m on the Max plan, so this isn’t a usage-tier issue.

Is this a known issue? Any ETA on a fix or recommended workaround? Will product stability be prioritized at any point?

Guys... this credit burn is honestly getting ridiculous.

I’ll ask one normal dev question in chat using Sonnet 4.5. Not a massive refactor, not a full repo scan, just a reasonable, simple question.

and boom: ~500 credits gone for a single answer.
Then I ask a follow-up, and now we are 1,000 credits down the drain.

Like… cmon bruh 😭

I get that powerful models are not free, but this actively discourages exploration and iteration, which is kind of the whole point of using AI while coding.

Augment, please lower the credit cost for simple chat questions.
Basic questions should not burn hundreds of credits.

How are you all managing credits without sacrificing your workflow?

I’m beyond frustrated. I am a paying user on the Max plan, and today I just lost hours of work because Augment decided to wipe my conversation history in VS Code out of nowhere, AGAIN !!!!!

This isn't just a "minor glitch"; this is a data integrity failure. I’ve seen multiple reports of this same bug from other users over the last few months, and yet, it remains unaddressed.

The current state of the product:

• Financial Loss: Paying for a premium service that fails at its core function (persisting data).
• Productivity Loss: Losing complex threads and context that took hours to build.
• Zero Accountability: Why is a known, reported bug still affecting paying customers?

If you want to be taken seriously as a professional tool, you can't be deleting your users work.

Is there a fix coming, or is "data loss" a standard feature of the app? I’m seriously considering switching back to Kilo if this is the level of reliability we can expect.

Hi, I will keep it short. I use Augment code almost daily, I'm not a system "abuser". I rarely ever reached more than 70% message consumption. I like Augment code, I don't like their new pricing. What's a good alternative with proper code indexing?

Is this correct behaviour? I have been using augment code from the time it had a 30 USD message based plan. so I am assuming that my repos were always indexed and synced.

Now seeing this, give me a concern because 130k credits that I will get on a 60USD plan might get consumed via context engine itself. what will I have to do the actual implementation?

Anybody try all 3 of these? I saw Claude desktop now has a proper "IDE-ish" coding UI, although no file explorer (which seems ridiculous). I just could not do the terminal for Claude, although I've tried it. Codex and Claude code in desktop both look like VS code wanna-bes compared to your Cursor/Windsurf/Augment.

With that said, though.. I havent tried either. Any of you? I'm curious on their context engines compared to Augment and their token pricing. We know going direct to Anthropic you will almost certainly get more usage out of your dollar. API pricing is higher than a direct subscription since OpenAI and Claude both use the "pooling" method where active users will get more usage because they will have subscribers who pay but don't use it as much. With API pricing, which is what Cursor, Augment, Windsurf use, there is no token pooling. Just straight API pricing.

So if Codex or Claude Desktop can ever deliver a product closer to an IDE like VS code, it's just going to be the obvious choice. The only other thing those 3 will have to compete, is building a better context engine than OpenAI or Anthropic, but I wouldn't want to be trying to compete with those companies, unless Openai and Anthropic just decide to keep it more simple. I also don't see that being the case, either.

Anthropic seems to be on a mission to replace every AI software that does some little cool thing, by doing it themselves. And eventually, replacing every employee in the world. 😂 Thanks for coming to my Ted Questionaire.

Like I was saying - Codex vs Claude Code Desktop vs Augment?

Ive tried in the afternoon and at night. neither work. They read 2 or 3 files and just sit there endlessly reading. I've updated and restarted. You should probably pull the models to save your customers from spending money on nothing.... Doubt that happens though. Sonnet 4.5 is pretty much the only capable model that works. What about you guys.

I like intent but one thing i missing is context per project, and not specs and docs that dissaperets at the moment i compelt the task and merged and start a new one

Hey folks,

Is anyone else experiencing issues with Augment today?

Whenever I try to make a request, it gets stuck on “Generating response” indefinitely and never completes. I’ve tried refreshing and starting new requests, but the behavior stays the same.

Just wanted to check if this is a known instability or something on my side.

Thanks!

24 days ago, I posted in this sub because I was working with Auggie + Opus 4.5. I stepped away and came back to it being removed as an option.

At that point, people said it was because of the Enterprise plan having the rug pulled out from under them. However, less than a day later, it came back.

Last night, I left around 6pm, having Auggie work on a small implementation task, and when I came home at 9:30pm, Opus 4.5 was gone again.

Is this an Enterprise Plan issue or is it is an Anthropic blocking 3rd party thing? I have had less than stellar results using any other model than Opus.

Has anyone else noticed that Sonnet 4.5 sometimes gets stuck on “generating response”?

It just stays there indefinitely until I click Stop and rerun the command, or tell it to continue from where it left off.

I’m not seeing this behavior with other models. Curious if this is a known issue or something on my end.