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

GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

docs.z.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 90 posts

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#41

Post by KronisLV »

chisleu wrote: post #13

I've been using GLM 4.5 and GLM 4.5 Air for a while now. The Air model is light enough to run on a macbook pro and is useful for Cline. I can run the full GLM model on my Mac Studio, but the TPS is so slow that it's only useful for chatting. So I hooked up with openrouter to try but didn't have the same success. Any of the open weight models I try with open router give sub standard results. I get better results from…

> I get better results from Qwen 3 coder 30b a3b locally than I get from Qwen 3 Coder 480b through open router. I'm really concerned that some of the providers are using quantized versions of the models so they can run more models per card and larger batches of inference.

This doesn't match my experience precisely, but I've definitely had cases where some of the providers had consistently worse output for the same model than others, the solution there was to figure out which ones those are and to denylist them in the UI.

As for quantized versions, you can check it for each model and provider, for example: https://openrouter.ai/qwen/qwen3-coder/providers

You can see that these providers run FP4 versions:

  * DeepInfra (Turbo)
And these providers run FP8 versions:

  * Chutes
  * GMICloud
  * NovitaAI
  * Baseten
  * Parasail
  * Nebius AI Studio
  * AtlasCloud
  * Targon
  * Together
  * Hyperbolic
  * Cerebras
I will say that it's not all bad and my experience with FP8 output has been pretty decent, especially when I need something done quickly and choose to use Cerebras - provided their service isn't overloaded, their TPS is really, really good.

You can also request specific precision on a per request basis: https://openrouter.ai/docs/features/provider-routing#quantiz... (or just make a custom preset)

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#42

Post by CuriouslyC »

Szpadel wrote: post #40
arjie wrote: post #4

Okay, I'm going to try it, but why didn't you link the information on how to integrate it with Claude Code: https://docs.z.ai/scenario-example/develop-tools/claude Chinese software always has such a design language: - prepaid and then use credit to subscribe - strange serif font - that slider thing for captcha But I'm going to try it out now.

you can use any model with Claude code thanks to https://github.com/musistudio/claude-code-router but in my testing other models do not work well, looks like prompts are either very optimized for Claude, or other models are just not great yet with such agentic environment I was especially disappointed with grok code. it is very fast as advertised but in generating spaces and new lines in function calling until it hit…

You don't need claude code router to use GLM, just set the env var to the GLM url. Also, I generally advise people not to bother with claude code router, Bifrost can do the same job and it's much better software.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#43

Post by sdesol »

Szpadel wrote: post #40
arjie wrote: post #4

Okay, I'm going to try it, but why didn't you link the information on how to integrate it with Claude Code: https://docs.z.ai/scenario-example/develop-tools/claude Chinese software always has such a design language: - prepaid and then use credit to subscribe - strange serif font - that slider thing for captcha But I'm going to try it out now.

you can use any model with Claude code thanks to https://github.com/musistudio/claude-code-router but in my testing other models do not work well, looks like prompts are either very optimized for Claude, or other models are just not great yet with such agentic environment I was especially disappointed with grok code. it is very fast as advertised but in generating spaces and new lines in function calling until it hit…

> But in my testing, other models do not work well. It looks like prompts are either very optimized for Claude, or other models are just not great yet with such an agentic environment.

Anybody who has done any serious development with LLMs would know that prompts are not universal. The reason why Claude Code is good is because Anthropic knows Claude Sonnet is good, and that they only need to create prompts that work well with their models. They also have the ability to train their models to work with specific tools and so forth.

It really is a kind of fool's errand to try to create agents that can work well with many different models from different providers.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#44

Post by KronisLV »

This is really cool and should work well with something like RooCode as well. Usually I keep going back to either Claude Sonnet or Gemini 2.5 Pro (also tried out GPT-5, was quite unimpressed) but both of those are relatively expensive.

I've tried using the more expensive model for planning and something a bit cheaper for doing the bulk of changes (the Plan / Ask and Code modes in RooCode) which works pretty nicely, but settling on just one model like GLM 4.5 would be lovely! Closest to that I've gotten to up until now has been the Qwen3 Coder model on OpenRouter.

I think I used about 40M tokens with Claude Sonnet last month, more on Gemini and others, that's a bit expensive for my liking.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#45

Post by blitzar »

numlocked wrote: post #22
vincirufus wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah I too have heard similar concerns with Open models on OpenRouter, but haven't been able to verify it, as I don't use that a lot

(OpenRouter COO here) We are starting to test this and verify the deployments. More to come on that front -- but long story short is that we don't have good evidence that providers are doing weird stuff that materially affects model accuracy. If you have data points to the contrary, we would love them. We are heavily incentivized to prioritize/make transparent high-quality inference and have no incentive to offer qua…

> We ... have no incentive to offer quantized/poorly-performing alternatives

However your providers do have such an incentive.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#46

Post by jedisct1 »

Not just Claude Code. Their plans $3 and $15 plans work even better with tools like Roo Code.

After Claude models have recently become dumb, I switched to Qwen3-Coder (there's a very generous free tier) and GLM4.5, and I'm not looking back.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#47

Post by whatevermom »

awestroke wrote: post #39
tonyhart7 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I called it "chinnese chatpcha", back then chinnese chaptcha is so much harder than western counterpart but now gchaptcha spam me with 5 different image if I missing a tiles for crossroad, so chinnese chaptcha is much better in my opinion also there is variant that match the image based on shadow and different order of shape its much better in my opinion because its use much more interactivity, solving western chaptc…

I assume both of the approaches are useless at actually stopping bots

They deter newbies but this is not a problem for experienced developers.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#48

Post by unsupp0rted »

Anthropic can't compete with this on cost. They're probably bleeding money as it is.

But they can sort of compete on model quality, by no longer dumbing down their models. That'll be expensive too, but it's a lever they have.

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#49

Post by snthpy »

KronisLV wrote: post #41
chisleu wrote: post #13

I've been using GLM 4.5 and GLM 4.5 Air for a while now. The Air model is light enough to run on a macbook pro and is useful for Cline. I can run the full GLM model on my Mac Studio, but the TPS is so slow that it's only useful for chatting. So I hooked up with openrouter to try but didn't have the same success. Any of the open weight models I try with open router give sub standard results. I get better results from…

> I get better results from Qwen 3 coder 30b a3b locally than I get from Qwen 3 Coder 480b through open router. I'm really concerned that some of the providers are using quantized versions of the models so they can run more models per card and larger batches of inference. This doesn't match my experience precisely, but I've definitely had cases where some of the providers had consistently worse output for the same mo…

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. What about qwen3-coder on Cerebras? I'm happy to pay the $50 for the speed as long as results are good. How does it compare with glm-4.5?

Re: GLM 4.5 with Claude Code

#50

Post by typpilol »

indigodaddy wrote: post #33
numlocked wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(OpenRouter COO here) We are starting to test this and verify the deployments. More to come on that front -- but long story short is that we don't have good evidence that providers are doing weird stuff that materially affects model accuracy. If you have data points to the contrary, we would love them. We are heavily incentivized to prioritize/make transparent high-quality inference and have no incentive to offer qua…

So what's the deal with Chutes and all the throttling and errors. Seems like users are losing their minds over this.. at least from all the reddit threads I'm seeing

What's chutes?
Post reply on HN