can't say it become worse, but at some point it stops be so useful as it was before - it looks like magic disapear

I can't say which is better, but 4.6 was the most intense

Yeah buddy, Claude Code is honestly getting worse lately. It's been giving me buggy or incorrect code for my projects as well

It's not just you. It's getting much worse. There is a lot of talk on X about it, along with hypotheses and evidence-based testing.

It is probably not just you, but I would be careful about blaming the 1M context window specifically.

Anthropic’s recent postmortem described several Claude Code regressions around default reasoning effort, context/thinking retention, and a system prompt change to reduce verbosity. Those seem more likely to explain the “less careful / forgetful / worse follow-through” behavior than the context window alone.

I would compare the same task in a fresh session, with the effort setting fixed, and ideally against a few repeatable tasks from your own codebase. Otherwise it is very hard to tell whether the regression is the model, Claude Code’s harness, context management, or just a stale session.

not just you. I use it daily and the quality has been inconsistent lately. Some sessions are great, others it feels like it forgot how to read my codebase. For 200 euros/month you'd expect to be nothing but awesome.

Due to the copilot nerfing recently I've switched to codex and gpt 5.4 (and now especially 5.5) have been doing pretty great.

But even codex has these super weird time limits. It's really starting to show that these companies must have been losing a ton of money with all the recent limits and degration.

I'm still on the "camp" that most of these unicorns will be F'ed by open and local models in the next few years, at least in these coding/chatbox niches and then they'll just be perpetually (re)searching for AGI :shrug: