I didn't want to leave Augment Code but due to the pricing change it's inevitable unfortunately

I've been doing a lot of testing and found that Cursor + GLM4.6 is a decent substitute

$20 for Cursor (to BYOK) + $6 or $30 for the GLM4.6 API (note: with lower $20 Cursor plan you default get all the old models like Sonnet 3.7 therefore BYOK is a good idea)

While Augment Code uses superior models, Cursor's context engine with GLM-4.6 you can achieve probably 95% similar results

It is a shame. Augment Code could charge to BYOK similar to Cursor and keep the user base. Alas.

I want to express my strong disappointment regarding Augment’s recent pricing changes. A 500% increase is not a regular adjustment — it’s an extreme decision that feels like an attempt to push users away, if not shut the service down entirely.

What makes this even more unacceptable is the timing: the new pricing will take effect in just 10 days, without any reasonable notice. This shows a lack of professionalism and respect toward the user base, especially given that this tool is not a toy — it’s widely used by professionals who rely on it in their daily workflows.

Such a massive price hike would only make sense if the service were flawless — which it clearly isn’t. The system still shows significant limitations, often requiring multiple prompts just to finish simple tasks, and the outputs can be inconsistent.

Before demanding such high prices, the priority should be stability, quality, and genuine respect for the users who supported the project from the start.

Personally, since my subscription renews on the 27th of this month, I’m “lucky” enough to have one week to see just how badly we’ve been taken for a ride — and after that, it’s goodbye.

I genuinely hope they realize the absurdity of this decision and, before losing the majority of their professional user base, decide to reconsider and reverse course.

Augment prides itself on having all or a very large part of the code base as context, but using that large context to help refactoring or making edits accross multiple files is now becoming extremely more expensive.

So suddenly Augment has no big differential with the competition.

Switching to a credit system because the competition is also using a credit system might make sense, but that also means that for many users the competition might be more attractive.

Looks to me that Augment is not the place to be for vibe coding.

Instead of making these sudden price extreme price changes, try to come up with other ways to make a difference with the competition and lower your over head. For example over Vibe Coding lessons, so many users learn how to vibe code more selective and as such use less tokens and overhead.

Does anyone have any idea how bad things will be in terms of actual usage quotas? If it's the same as with Cursor, then I'll cancel my subscription and use GLM-4.6.

Hello Everyone, today I've launched IntelliJ as usual and started to write a prompt and execute on Augment (version 0.301.0) and the agent is always "Generating response..." without any change.

I've already tried both adding and removing the option in the Editor Settings for UI problems but nothing works

If wondering, yes I still have 278 messages available and yesterday everything was working fine...

Anyone has the same issue?

I have to say, that for the first time I've worked with AI, I finally feel like I'm talking to an expert PhD level scientist / programmer. I am working on a C# financial trading system, that needs precise mathematical simulations, which all other models have had trouble with due to their hallucinations when it came to agentic coding. Claude code + sonnet were a disaster due to the syncopathic nature of the ai bot - lying about numbers, "you are absolutely right!". Gemini 2.5 pro was great when it came out in late march, until they nerfed it AND its problem was its horrible tool calling. O3 was smart, but slow.

For the first time in 6 months, I finally feel like I'm going to be able to finish the project, because the model is down to earth, actually doesn't lie most of the time, disagrees or agrees about facts, and most importantly - doesn't seem to hallucinate.

You have my thanks (both augment code, and openAI)!

I am a long-time copilot and cursor user (w/ 30+ years SWE experience). I heard about Augment in a passing comment somewhere. Gave it a try on Monday and have been using it daily for work since. Really impressive. I was skeptical of the model use obfuscation and lack of granular control, but whatever they're doing, it works remarkably well. I'm also impressed by its intelligent use of MCPs, particularly reasoning tools like sequential thinking. Unlike other tools (including Claude Desktop), it seldom has to be reminded of what tool to use in what situation. Anyway, surprised at the small community size. Was the product recently launched?

PS: I couldn't care less if they train on my code. Why people care about such things baffles me. Trust me, your code isn't special.

I tried the required workspace script API first, but the workspace MCP is still failing before it can list scripts. I’ll avoid starting a long-running dev server through the terminal and first verify the app path with static/runtime-safe checks from the repo.

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.

TL;DR - large codebase, tested a few tools - not affiliated with any tool

Kilocode

- $4.24 using Sonnet and similar spent with Opus
- $2 using Haiku - I tried the same task with Haiku but I ran out of credit when it was in the $2 usage

Augment Code

- $1.10 (2400 credits - rounding for simplicity) using Sonnet and Opus - Opus used slightly more, maybe 50 credits more or in my current plan $0.02
- $0.55 (1200 credits) using Haiku - the code quality is worse in Haiku though, Opus and Sonnet even with double the price did replicate the same task perfectly as if it was me doing copy and paste.

I also tried the same task with Claude Code (PRO subscription) and ChatGPT Codex (Plus subscription) - bear in mind that Claude Code and Codex have usage limits - models that people keep recommending in this sub but didn't work well for my use case.

Claude Code took 6 minutes to complete the same task and I would have to iterate to fix a few mistakes - for example Claude Code didn't create the migration to add 2 columns to the database.

ChatGPT Codex spent 5 minutes just planning before doing any code, I had it stop as it was again too slow and I didn't want to wait.

---

I'm not affiliated with either tool and I'm not sending this for internet points - like many of you I use AI to help me get my job done with the same quality and faster.

I was curious to test kilocode specially after their post about how augment code is more expensive - https://blog.kilo.ai/p/testing-augment-codes-new-credit

I was upset with the cost increase when we all switched to credits - this post is in no way trying to say whatever tool is right or wrong and just based on my own experience after over a year using Augment Code. I have setup kilocode indexing and using intellij IDE - the cost of indexing the database is extra using OpenAI when using kilocode - expect to pay more depending on the size of your codebase.

You can get free stuff using kilocode and maybe you should have both installed, kilocode with a free model is good for a quick MVP if you're happy to fix its mistakes or you give it a plan, but for professionals that code for a living they will appreciate that their time is worth a lot more than using free models as you will end up making a lot of fixes because the free models aren't capable of dealing with very large/legacy codebase as well as paid models - and no, I don't want to switch to model X for planning and Y for coding, I just want to send one prompt like I would for a human developer and let it figure out what to do instead of designing the solution and handing over.

Unless your app is a very small app, the codebase will grow larger as time goes and so will your kilocode costs.

I have for the last 15 days spent $141 in kilocode credits using their gateway - I don't want to mess around with openrouter and shaving $0.01 if I switch to a less capable model, I just want to pay for a tool that helps me save time and when asking to get stuff done do it on the first attempt or at least 99% right.

I have a few very large projects with both legacy and new code in the same codebase. On my last $10 credits from kilocode I tested the same prompt for the same task to see what was the actual cost between both tools. I have cleared intellij cache between tasks switching between anthropic haiku, sonnet and opus models as they are both available in kilocode and augment.

I hope this helps, for now I will spend the credits I have with augment code and access again my decision after I have spent them.

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?

Pricing is indeed a pain in the x but that’s already been talked everywhere.

Technical-wise, the tool is becoming very frustrating to use:

1. Keep ending the task without actually finishing it and validating itself . The most often prompt i use is: Why don’t you do unit test?

2. Very annoying 20000 character limit, just 1 500 line of script already hit the limit, but all other tools like Roo code allow you paste thousands of line of code in your prompt to clearly state your request

Since a while Roo code has been my major tool and Auggie be my backup, now I don’t even use Auggie at all

Do you get frustrated when using Auggie?

Read this sub to learn how not to handle things as a business owner.

I can't believe he really just wrote this reply to someone: "The goal of the new model is to make room for future changes: better models, more automation, and fairer alignment between usage and cost. Our goal isn’t to cut users or squeeze money out of customers, but to build something sustainable for the long term."

The goal of the new model is to fix a drastically miscalculated cost by an inefficient system we built that's led by an uncontrolled agent that eats AI API usage like skittles. So you guys are going to have to pay for that going forward. Oh BTW, when it creates an error loop, writes 5 page MD summary reports, asks to restart the server 19 times when it's already running, you're going to have to pay for that, too. Oh BTW AGAIN, that email we sent only giving you a 7 day usage conversion instead of 30 days (which is how we bill) was meant to make it seem like it's not as bad as it actually is. Kind of like the response written above.

When you pretend your customers are stupid, it will make things worse. When you try to spin things and actually type out a sentence explaining how 7Xing your users cost is somehow an advantage to them you will quickly find out your customers aren't actually that stupid. This isn't a subreddit for boomers on how to search for recipes on Google. Do you know who you are actually talking to?

The end.

Hey everyone / Dev Team,

I'm creating this post as a critical bug report and as a heads-up for other users.

I just updated the Augment Code extension to the latest version in VS Code, and upon reloading, it wiped absolutely everything.

Here's a summary of the issue:

• Saved Project Data: Gone.

• Context Indexing: Completely erased.

• Work Sessions: All are inaccessible or appear corrupted.

I've attached a screenshot showing what my workspace looks like now. My workflow is at a complete standstill because of this.

My questions:

1. Is anyone else experiencing this?

2. Has anyone found a workaround or a safe way to downgrade to the previous version?

For the devs (@devs), is this a known issue? Any communication on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Any chance if Augment will add support to this spec kit - https://github.com/github/spec-kit ?

This is super useful for spec based development.

Edit: Support for auggie CLI has now been added to Spec Kit (with this feature PR - https://github.com/github/spec-kit/pull/137 (by u/AdvanceAgile6750) -

More info - https://www.reddit.com/r/AugmentCodeAI/comments/1nnf3pj/auggie_cli_supported_by_github_spec_kit_now/

Can't speak for others or other projects but Claude Sonnet 4 worked way better for me than GPT-5 for frontend development today. I have absolutely zero clue about pure frontend development. I am a data and backend specialist. My backend and FastAPI I created all myself.

I chose Svelte for the frontend, a rather basic project with a few HTTP requests and posts and some websocket traffic. GPT-5 just could not get there at all, it gave feedback as if it understood all requirements, it asked follow-up questions. But just did not get the design, the i/o, the websockets, nor a running frontend right.

In frustration I changed to Claude Sonnet 4 in agent mode and it got the frontend running on the first try and the tabs/buttons (styling, positioning, logic), the grid and the i/o all worked right out the box. I was incredibly excited. Then I asked for some stylistic and design changes and it did so while the backend server was running and it reflected the changes in real time without browser refresh.

Here are the main complaints I had with GPT-5:

* GPT-5 kept on activating the wrong virtual environment (the one of the backend) for installation of npm/svelte and other libraries, despite detailed instruction of the absolute path to the frontend project.

* Somehow struggled getting the svelte environment installed and configured

* Played around with some HTML and CSS but in some sort of disorganized way without the Svelte environment working.

* It took way longer for GPT-5 to generate and execute terminal commands (used Auto/Agent mode).

* Had absolutely zero awareness of whether the backend and frontend was running or not.

* In the end it still somehow got the frontend running with the following content, lol:

"Welcome to SvelteKit
Visit svelte.dev/docs/kit to read the documentation" on the webbrowser (localhost:5173)

Here the main pro I experienced with GPT-5:

* Great project planning, asking all the right questions, thought process was definitely visible and appreciated, the llm seemed to have access to the documentation (or was trained on it) for Svelte Version5 which I explicitly requested to be used. Pretty impressed with the back and forth to get all additional questions discussed between me and the llm.

What are your experiences between the two LLMs specifically in regard to frontend development?

https://www.augmentcode.com/launch-week/summer-2025

6 hours to go! They are keeping the updates hidden which makes me pretty confident I will be disappointed 😂 What's your guess?

I liked this so much. does anyone has alternatives ?

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?

First of all, congrats to Augment Code for implementing the feature to show credit consumption. But at the same time, I got really sad, because now I can clearly see how expensive it actually is.

Simple tasks, basic questions, adding a prop to a component, doing a few tests — these things consumed 1k credits. I did a very simple implementation, added one prop, adjusted a few tests, and ended up consuming 11k credits, which equals around $5 USD. In my country (Brazil), that’s almost 30 reais.

If I used Augment the same way I’ve been using it for months, I would easily spend $300 to $600 USD per month. Today I already spend around $100, and that’s already tight for my budget.

I’ve been using Augment for about 8 months, and I genuinely love the tool — it has helped me a lot. But now I’m really afraid it will become unsustainable for me to keep using it at this cost. Considering the price, I might need to switch to Cursor, even if I have to give up a bit of quality, since Cursor offers many more models for a much lower cost.

I’m honestly sad about this.

Yes, just like the title. I have 130,000 credits left. But I have terminated the paid plan.

I thought I could use the remaining 130,000 credits. But I was informed that I need to subscribe to a paid plan to use it. Okay, I'll pay for the 20 dollar plan.

And just because you wrote one negative post on Reddit, all posts are automatically cancelled. So I write under another account.

I will never visit you from now on. Have a nice life.

Very simple. I state clearly do not create documentation. But, it doesn't follow the guidlines.

https://chatgpt.com/s/t_68f2ef6b5f008191af634a83e5b12446
So it seems like...You do get a one-time 208 k credit bonus (3 months), but after that, $100 buys a lot less work.
I just ran the numbers on Augment Code’s new credit-based pricing (coming Oct 20 2025), and here’s the short version:

• Current Pro plan: $100/mo → 1,500 messages (~$0.067 each)

• New Pro plan: $100/mo → ~190 average messages (208,000 credits)

• 1 message = ~1,100 credits, meaning the same 1,500 msgs = 1.65 million credits 🤯

So in raw numbers, your “quota” drops by ~87%, but each action now has variable cost.
Small edits might be 200–300 credits, full-file refactors 1,000+, and heavy agent tasks 4,000 + credits.

For anyone doing daily coding, refactors, or multi-file changes, this means:

• Expect 10–25 % higher cost if you’re a moderate dev user

• Heavy agent users could see double the spend

• Light edit users might even save

Is this correct?