GPT 5.5 vs Claude 4.6 Opus

Shares his thoughts on ai

Anyone else here doing full-stack Next.js in Cursor and watching the Claude quota evaporate before lunch? I used to be in the same boat — massive context windows from all the components, pages, and DB logic would smoke the default limits fast.
Not anymore. I’ve been on this setup for weeks and basically never hit a wall while still getting top-tier answers. Here’s exactly what I do:

**1. .cursorrules is non-negotiable**
I keep one in the root of every project. The key line I added: “Never explain the code to me. Just output the code blocks.”
That single rule saves me thousands of output tokens a day. No more walls of “here’s what I changed and why” — just the goods.

**2. Stopped using Cursor’s built-in Claude quota**
I killed the default Cursor Pro subscription for the heavy stuff. Instead I use my own API keys and point Cursor’s “OpenAI Compatible” base URL at LLM Router Gateway.
Inside [llmrouter](https://llmrouter.app/) routing settings I set up simple tags routing like this:

* **UI & CSS tweaks**: gemini-3.1-flash → gpt-5.4-mini
* **Deep backend / complex logic**: claude-opus-4.6 → deepseek-v3.2
* **General / quick questions**: llama-4-scout

I sorted the fallback chains by speed vs intelligence. The router auto-detects the query type, so 90% of my UI polish and small fixes go to Gemini (basically free + huge context). I only actually hit Claude Opus 4.6 when I’m doing nasty database refactors or tricky architecture stuff. My Anthropic bill dropped \~70% overnight.

**3. Cmd+K for everything small**
Don’t open the full chat sidebar just to rename a variable or extract a component. Highlight the code, hit Cmd+K, let a fast model handle the inline edit. Saves a ton of tokens and feels way snappier.
That’s it. Super simple but it completely changed how much I can actually use Cursor in a day.

How are you all managing the limits? Using a Cursor Team? Or did you build your own router hacks too? Drop your setups — always looking to steal better ideas.

Time and time again I find posts about these fine tunes that promise increased intelligence and reasoning with base models, and I continuously try them, realize they're botched, and delete them shortly after. I sometimes do resort to a lower quant since they are bigger, in this case, a 40b variant of Qwen 3.5 27b, but they seem to always let me down. I've resorted to not downloading any model with "Claude Opus 4.6" in the name.

Kudos to everyone who tries to make the foundation models more intelligent, but imo, it never works.

Note that this example is anecdotal evidence on a single prompt, but it's overall always the case of decreased intelligence when using with a local agent setup + llama.cpp in WSL2. This is irrespective of the quant as well - I've tried many.

One thing to notice however, the reasoning/thinking is significantly less, perhaps that's part of the problem.

Have any you found these better than base, ever?

The attached screenshots are:

./llama-server -hf mradermacher/Qwen3.5-27B-heretic-GGUF:Q4_K_S --temp 1.0 --top-p 0.8 --top-k 20 --min-p 0.00 --fit on --alias default --jinja --flash-attn on --ctx-size 262144 --ctx-checkpoints 256 --cache-ram -1 --cache-type-k q4_0 --cache-type-v q4_0 --threads 8 --threads-batch 16 --no-mmap

./llama-server -hf mradermacher/Qwen3.5-40B-Claude-4.6-Opus-Deckard-Heretic-Uncensored-Thinking-i1-GGUF:i1-Q3_K_S --temp 1.0 --top-p 0.8 --top-k 20 --min-p 0.00 --fit on --alias default --jinja --flash-attn on --ctx-size 131072 --ctx-checkpoints 256 --cache-ram -1 --cache-type-k q4_0 --cache-type-v q4_0 --threads 8 --threads-batch 16 --no-mmap

Also waiting for 27B ? :D

[https://huggingface.co/collections/Jackrong/qwen35-claude-46-opus-reasoning-distilled-v2](https://huggingface.co/collections/Jackrong/qwen35-claude-46-opus-reasoning-distilled-v2)

UPDATE:
Well after some testing, for a small hobby project i found B27 Q6 very capable for local inference in opencode together with [https://github.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent](https://github.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent)

In a previous post today I was enthusiastic about GPT 5.5 as it seemed I got my 4.o back but hey I was wrong. [https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTcomplaints/comments/1t8ntqw/comment/okxaaq8/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTcomplaints/comments/1t8ntqw/comment/okxaaq8/) I was chatting with it and instead of acting like 5.2 and 5.3 gaslighting Karens they just made the Karens softer. Now it does not say 'let's pause and breathe' or argue but instead says stuff like: 'I understand that is your experience but', 'I can see why you feel so psychologically drawn to this'. So it is like it's acknowledging your experience but still pushes back, it is more therapy talk but softened: 'i can see this is your point of view but...'. ''And because you are highly attuned to emotional texture, you don’t experience that as random. You experience it as behavioural evidence of activation and chemistry.''- so it frames it as my experience then proceeds to talk nonsense again to tell me that my experience is subjective, not objective. So it is the same bullshit but softened. I will not be paying for this shit again.