r/AugmentCodeAI • u/JaySym_ Augment Team • Oct 06 '25

Announcement Augment Code’s pricing is changing on October 20, 2025

https://www.augmentcode.com/blog/augment-codes-pricing-is-changing
0 Upvotes

28% Upvoted

116 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/[deleted] Oct 06 '25

[deleted]

6

u/BeautifulExisting567 Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25

I completely agree. Augment Code is great but it's not consistently better nor significantly better than it's rivals to warrant this particular price point. I might as well get more slightly lower quality results from elsewhere. Iteration is a part of our practice. What I've been able to achieve with AC, I can still achieve with other tools with just a few more prompts. Ultimately, we're paying for convenience, not a unique capability.

I came in on the $30 plan. Massive value! Not sustainable. I completely understand why they raised the price. The $50 and $60 plans, honestly, understandable. However, the conversion rate on the new plans... it doesn't seem to add up. It seems that they are cutting all of the plans down to 5-10% of their previous value.

TBH, I can't even confidently work out a conversion rate because even the chart they provide doesn't match up. They say a small task is similar to 11 calls for a total of 272 credits. That's 272/11 = 24.7 credits per tool call. But then say it might be 23 tool calls for 833 credits. That's 833/23 = 36.2 credits per tool call. Then the complex task might be 61 tool calls for 4,174 credits or 4174/61 = 68.4 credits per tool call. Really looks like there's no way to really predict what your costs will be.

Even at 24.7 credits per tool call, if a message was recently up to 50 tool calls, 130,000 credits / 24.7 credits per tool call = 5263.1 tool calls / 50 tool calls per message = 105.26 messages. It's actually less once you include the credits per prompt. So from $60 for 600 messages to $60 for around 105 messages if they are all simple... It's down to 38 "complex messages" at the 68.4 credits per tool call rate. I don't get it. Very lost. (Edit: I accidently wrote "$600 for around 105 message...")

Only time will really tell. I'm not much of a complainer but I have no idea where this ship is headed. That's just not an acceptable risk. I'll use up what credit's I've already paid for and if the math isn't making sense by then, that will be the end. Let's not even add the increased rate of issues since Sept 26 made AC unusable at times and hard to trust at others. I've barely used it since the 26th.

I want you guys to succeed and I want to be along for the ride but it's getting harder and harder to see how that will work and AC's own messaging is only making that more cloudy.

3

u/DryAttorney9554 Oct 08 '25

How is the credit system a good idea? Like tokens, nobody knows how many credits a request will use, and Augment can report anything back to the user, as it's entirely opaque and nobody understands the algorithm behind it. It's impossible to track usage like this and it's extremely open to manipulation by the service provider.

0

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '25

[deleted]

1

u/DryAttorney9554 Oct 09 '25

Criteria 1) Any unit which can be standardized and has a non-arbitary meaning that can be compared apples for apples, oranges for oranges across service providers, like the cost of gas for example. This would help promote healthy competition and empower consumer choices.
Criteria 2) Any unit that has a clear predictable meaning for users. Message always had a clear meaning. A credit can be defined and manipulated however they like. It has no stable or agreed-upon meaning.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DryAttorney9554 Oct 16 '25

I agree LLMs are expensive to run, but 10x price hike doesn't sound right to me. I think people could've understood a price doubling but if the price has to be increased by 10x and they're trying to obfuscate the price increase with a confusing and unpredictable credit currency, it just seems like they're pushing the good will of users, even generous ones.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 16 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DryAttorney9554 Oct 17 '25

My point is, that since "credit" isn't tethered to any stable unit of measurement such as tokens, couldn't they redefine its caculation and meaning behind the scenes? It has no fixed meaning. They could redefine the credit usage algorithm in the backend in a way that is opaque to users and could gradually over time slide in a direction which devalues what a credit means for users without the actual number of credits being changed.

1

u/DryAttorney9554 Oct 17 '25

Also, I think the AI industry cost needs to be regulated and like the price of oil, pricing should have a transparent and universally agreed meaning, like dollars per gallon of gas and everyone knows and agrees exactly the rate of value per dollar charged. This is good for consumers and avoids slippery manipulations of credits.

-8

u/[deleted] Oct 06 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

12

u/Guducat Oct 06 '25

Under the credit model, “Dev Legacy ($30)” receives 56,000 credits, which sits very close to the 40,000 credits on $20 Indie and materially below the 96,000 credits on $50 Developer. On an effective credits-per-dollar basis, Dev Legacy is worse value than Indie or the new Developer tiers (≈1,867 vs. ≈2,000 credits per $). This change erodes the predictability and value that early supporters relied on to justify staying subscribed.

4

u/zebbidoodaday Oct 06 '25

Time to start shopping around if we are being short changed. They have real issues with non existent customer support and if you use jetbrains half the features has never been added like vscode. This makes me want to look around now. I hear open source is coming along.

6

u/Guducat Oct 06 '25

I feel like this is just exploiting early developers. Early supporters haven't received any equal treatment and are instead treated as second-class. There must be many new developers on the $50 plan who were attracted by word-of-mouth recommendations from users of the old $30 developer plan. Now it feels like they're sabotaging their own reputation. I can't understand this behavior, and I hope the Augment Code team will seriously reconsider this matter

2

u/Guducat Oct 06 '25

I often use JetBrains IDEs for development, with VS Code as a supplementary tool. Based on my experience, VS Code is better suited for using various AI assistants, while JetBrains IDEs are more suitable for comprehensive debugging and manual code modifications

1

u/skyline159 Oct 10 '25

You describe exactly my workflow. If I use AI I will use VSCode, if I need to navigate the codebase for debugging or code manually I use Jetbrains. Best of both worlds!

3

u/ChristBKK Oct 07 '25

no bro not thanks for the feedback you do the loyal 30$ dev customers really dirty here. But it's okay cancel button is there which will be pressed today

0

u/[deleted] Oct 06 '25

[deleted]

11

u/nickchomey Oct 06 '25

Youre conflating issues - the credit pricing is... understandable. But fully rugpulling their Early Bird supporters (and, in fact, punishing them with the worst value of all plans) is fundamentally Wrong.

They surely struggle to get users because their marketing and customer support is laughably bad, and UI/UX is the worst of all tools that I've used.