Man, I'm not so sure if I'd use something like this because the way I prompt already changes based upon what model I am using. I'm not convinced it would route to the right model based on my diction or whatever.
show comments
suyash
I would rather just use OpenCode - leverage AI models, even can host locally or paid ones with ease.
stpedgwdgfhgdd
The thing I do not get with these routers is that you will have more cache misses (5min ttl). And if there is one thing i’ve learned; using the cache is crucial.
How does this router translate to $$$ when developing?
show comments
spqw
This + making sure common requests are saved as reusable skills and scripts would probably save a large part of my token usage
As prices increase we will see more of these tools to optimise and make the best use of token budget
show comments
gautam_io
This is cool!
Will this use my Claude Pro/Max subscription? Or will it always use the API billing "pay as you go"?
show comments
alansaber
"We reward the routing model when it selects an LLM that achieves the task successfully" sounds pretty oversimplified
slopinthebag
> At Weave, we write ~all our code with AI
Great way to ensure I never use your product. I don't mean this in a snarky way, it's just not a very effective way of marketing imo.
_pdp_
Cool.. but I still don't get how this is going to save money. It seems to me that it might actually burn more money just because the whole system now seems to be coming from different LLMs.
Also, small LLMs are prone to stop before completion, throw errors and produce loops. Is this factored in the design of the tool? I am not sure.
edit: spellcheck
show comments
debarshri
It is funny. We are building something similar.
show comments
emilio_srg2
but this means you work with API pricing rather than subscription pricing. Isn’t it better to use claude or codex CLI etc directly in terms of cost?
show comments
arendtio
What is the difference from Cursors 'auto' mode?
show comments
ai_slop_hater
Isn't this more expensive than always using the same model, since, as I understand, by routing to different models you give up on cache?
Man, I'm not so sure if I'd use something like this because the way I prompt already changes based upon what model I am using. I'm not convinced it would route to the right model based on my diction or whatever.
I would rather just use OpenCode - leverage AI models, even can host locally or paid ones with ease.
The thing I do not get with these routers is that you will have more cache misses (5min ttl). And if there is one thing i’ve learned; using the cache is crucial.
How does this router translate to $$$ when developing?
This + making sure common requests are saved as reusable skills and scripts would probably save a large part of my token usage
As prices increase we will see more of these tools to optimise and make the best use of token budget
This is cool!
Will this use my Claude Pro/Max subscription? Or will it always use the API billing "pay as you go"?
"We reward the routing model when it selects an LLM that achieves the task successfully" sounds pretty oversimplified
> At Weave, we write ~all our code with AI
Great way to ensure I never use your product. I don't mean this in a snarky way, it's just not a very effective way of marketing imo.
Cool.. but I still don't get how this is going to save money. It seems to me that it might actually burn more money just because the whole system now seems to be coming from different LLMs.
Also, small LLMs are prone to stop before completion, throw errors and produce loops. Is this factored in the design of the tool? I am not sure.
edit: spellcheck
It is funny. We are building something similar.
but this means you work with API pricing rather than subscription pricing. Isn’t it better to use claude or codex CLI etc directly in terms of cost?
What is the difference from Cursors 'auto' mode?
Isn't this more expensive than always using the same model, since, as I understand, by routing to different models you give up on cache?