Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MAI-Code-1-Flash

microsoft.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 297 posts

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#111

Post by ojr »

hmokiguess wrote: post #42
ojr wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Gemini 3 Flash, I've seen the Claude Code setups, bullish on Anthropic people are driving up tokens but I am able to produce outcomes with a fraction of the money.

Do you mind sharing your workflow? What do you mean by fraction of the money, in my case personally, I'm yet to reach a session limit on the subscription plan. I'm not "tokenmaxxing" as they say, so hard to see a scenario in which the plan is expensive for the value I get.

I spend around $20 a month through API fees using my own harness, https://slidebits.com/isogen. Nothing too special, I prompt it produces file changes using grep and vector search and I can individually accept which files.

I also work on a consumer AI application https://apps.apple.com/us/app/slidebits-studio/id1138731130

For comparison someone showed me an internal company tool he was working on. He had Claude agents dangerously skipping permissions and firing up github branches through a vm sandbox just to make a single feature change. One agent to code and the other to review.

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#112

Post by alkonaut »

bel8 wrote: post #82

It's a start and I welcome competition but I don't think I ever used small cloud models like Haiku 4.5. They are cute but for serious coding they tend to waste your expensive time. And this certainly wont bring me back to GitHub Copilot which I cancelled yesterday. GitHub Copilot had competitive pricing until yesterday when they changed from per-request to one of the most expensive per-token quotas. Seriously, take a…

Won’t (presumably) all the market actors converge on similar pricing? If OpenAI stopped operating on subsidies and charge the true costs and their most token hungry customers are the ones that switch to Anthropic and others, then their pricing model switch will also be around the corner.

Unless of course we’re thinking Copilot will be more expensive than others longer term. But is that a reasonable assumption?

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#113

Post by [deleted] »

artemisart wrote: post #107
fooker wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They say hill climbing https://microsoft.ai/news/building-a-hillclimbing-machine-la... Unless they specifically clarify that the testing and training benchmarks are completely separate, we have to assume they test on the same 'hill' the model climbs.

Hill climbing doesn't mean much but absolutely doesn't imply they cheat on benchmarks. They have more details here https://microsoft.ai/news/introducing-mai-thinking-1/ it seems to be "RL on everything".

[deleted]

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#114

Post by nate »

bel8 wrote: post #82

It's a start and I welcome competition but I don't think I ever used small cloud models like Haiku 4.5. They are cute but for serious coding they tend to waste your expensive time. And this certainly wont bring me back to GitHub Copilot which I cancelled yesterday. GitHub Copilot had competitive pricing until yesterday when they changed from per-request to one of the most expensive per-token quotas. Seriously, take a…

The small stuff has their place. I have this safari extension and needed a way to quickly title people's chat histories. Haiku is the fast cheap thing to come up with decent titles of blocks of text. I feel like there's a bunch of those little things lying around you need a model for. I'm even finding Apple's Foundation Model is super useful for stuff like that. Even summarizing an article. It's like equally awful at doing it, but gets enough done to still be useful as a way to be like "oh yeah, this article is actually worth reading"

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#115

Post by bgirard »

redrove wrote: post #27
capten wrote: post #10

It's so weird to me that the benchmarks remain so low, but the models are marketed as revolutionary. And if you say that low coding capabilities aren't a problem, say that to the token price hike and 'general use' model setup. Why not sell it as a math agent? Why do I have to set up 4 agents to check each others' work?

It’s about bang for buck. That high a score for 5B params is pretty good, nigh unbelievable a short while ago. It is my belief that smaller models will get better and better, and even cloud SOTA models will shrink. Yet another reason the current buildout will feel like the railroads.

> It’s about bang for buck.

Hard to know when they don't give the price per token. Presumably it will be comparable to a low-mid range model in terms of price. But otherwise their 'Ideal Zone' is meaningless without factoring in the price per token. I don't how much tokens are being used, that's an implementation detail to me. I care about price / performance / latency.

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#116

Post by stefan_ »

alkonaut wrote: post #112
bel8 wrote: post #82

It's a start and I welcome competition but I don't think I ever used small cloud models like Haiku 4.5. They are cute but for serious coding they tend to waste your expensive time. And this certainly wont bring me back to GitHub Copilot which I cancelled yesterday. GitHub Copilot had competitive pricing until yesterday when they changed from per-request to one of the most expensive per-token quotas. Seriously, take a…

Won’t (presumably) all the market actors converge on similar pricing? If OpenAI stopped operating on subsidies and charge the true costs and their most token hungry customers are the ones that switch to Anthropic and others, then their pricing model switch will also be around the corner. Unless of course we’re thinking Copilot will be more expensive than others longer term. But is that a reasonable assumption?

Anthropic & co charge API users much more, not least to demolish the middlemen low-effort plays like Cursor and Copilot. To not own the model is not viable in 2026.

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#117

Post by foltik »

GaryBluto wrote: post #99

What's with the lack of Microsoft design language on the website? It's painfully obvious they're trying to emulate Anthropic's style here and it looks tacky.

Definitely vibed microslop, the giveaway is the broken header and scrolling on mobile.

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#119

Post by npn »

I personally do not like Microsoft, but congrats them to release this model.

While the scores are not good compare to other open weight model, the important thing to note is their training data (as they claimed) is very clean, without any synthetic datasets.

Re: MAI-Code-1-Flash

#120

Post by npn »

capten wrote: post #10

It's so weird to me that the benchmarks remain so low, but the models are marketed as revolutionary. And if you say that low coding capabilities aren't a problem, say that to the token price hike and 'general use' model setup. Why not sell it as a math agent? Why do I have to set up 4 agents to check each others' work?

from what I understand, it's because unlike the other models, MAI models haven't yet fine-tuned against the synthetic datasets specifically designed to boost the benchmark scores.
Post reply on HN