Hacker News Reader

Comment by altmanaltman | Hacker News Reader

aren't 3 and 4 a tradeoff though? Yes you have 3 but "decent performance" cannot be an extaled value as compared to "runs everywhere". If its used as a counter balance to 3 then it shouldn't be its own unique point basically saying 4 is true despite 3 in this case.

View on HN

when you're waiting for network or LLM inference the raw performance doesn't matter at all

This line of thinking I feel like assumes it's the only program running on your computer. Using less of my CPU and memory means my computer can do more things in parallel, or even run more instances of the harness. My laptop is sweating when I got 5+ claude code sessions running.

Is it actually claude using those CPU cycles though, or the agent running test suites and what not?

Honestly I would not be surprised when it actually IS claude using those resources... It is very clearly vibed

I haven't monitored CPU usage so closely, but seems to get heavy with basic tool calls and editing. Memory usage definitely is out of hand, have an idle session right now eating 500MB

yeah fair enough, my entire point is not about the application itself but the contradiction on using superlative terms for all points but a compromising/normal term for one. Like if performance is not revelant why include it in the list of benefits.

You would think raw performance wouldn't be a problem given most of whats happening is waiting for network calls and streaming tokens.

But modern bloat manages perfectly well to make apps that wait for network calls run poorly enough to give you a bad experience.

This is so very, very incorrect.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com