# Artikel Terkait Frameworks

Pusat Berita HTX menyediakan artikel terbaru dan analisis mendalam mengenai "Frameworks", mencakup tren pasar, pembaruan proyek, perkembangan teknologi, dan kebijakan regulasi di industri kripto.

How Token-Hungry is Claude Code? A Comparative Experiment Shows Up to 30x Difference Across Three Frameworks

Claude Code's Token Consumption Exposed: Comparison Experiment Shows Up to 30x Difference Between Frameworks A recent experiment by the Composio team tested the same model (Kimi K3) across three different agent frameworks (Claude Code, Hermes, and Kimi Code) on 28 identical tasks. While task completion rates were similar, token consumption varied dramatically. The median token usage was approximately 61k for Kimi Code, 67k for Hermes, and a staggering 340k for Claude Code – about 6 times more than Kimi Code. For individual tasks, the maximum difference reached 30x. In terms of cost, using Claude Code averaged $2 per task compared to $0.22 for Kimi Code and $0.28 for Hermes (based on Kimi K3 pricing). Speed also differed, with Hermes being the fastest. Analysis suggests Claude Code's high token usage stems from its harness repeatedly feeding extensive context (previous messages, tool calls, command outputs, file contents) back into the model across multiple interaction rounds, significantly inflating input tokens rather than generating longer outputs. This highlights a crucial trend: the agent framework (harness) is becoming as important as the model itself for cost and efficiency. A separate study from Writer showed that simply switching the orchestration layer to their optimized harness reduced average task cost by 41% and latency by 44% across various models without sacrificing quality. The conclusion is clear: for cost-effective AI agents, optimizing the harness may yield greater savings than changing the model. The future of agent competition may hinge not just on capability ("can it do it?") but on efficiency ("who does it for less?").

marsbit07/31 12:26

How Token-Hungry is Claude Code? A Comparative Experiment Shows Up to 30x Difference Across Three Frameworks

marsbit07/31 12:26

Three Frameworks for Ordinary People to Achieve AI Capability Leap: Say Goodbye to the Dilemma of 'Repeating Inputs Every Day'

Summary: This article outlines three frameworks for maximizing AI efficiency, moving beyond basic prompt usage. 1. **Three-Layer Evolution**: Users progress from (1) **Prompt** (one-off instructions, reset each session), to (2) **Project** (context-aware within a specific project), to (3) **Skill** (permanent, auto-applied knowledge). Most users stagnate at the first layer, repeating the same instructions daily with no cumulative improvement. Skills transform the AI from a chat tool into a personalized work system. 2. **Transaction vs. Compound Interest Mindset**: Using prompts is a linear transaction—effort and output are 1:1, and stopping resets progress. Investing time in building Skills is compound interest; a small initial time investment pays continuous dividends, as each Skill permanently elevates the AI's baseline performance. 3. **Thin Harness, Fat Skills**: The system architecture should prioritize thick, well-defined Skills (90% of the value—containing processes, standards, and domain knowledge) and a thin "harness" (the minimal technical environment). Avoid over-engineering the toolchain while neglecting the AI's actual knowledge. Skills are permanent assets that automatically improve with model updates. The key takeaway: Identify tasks you repeat, encode them into Skills (using tools like Claude's Skill Creator), and shift focus from daily prompting to building a compounding, self-improving AI system.

marsbit04/22 06:43

Three Frameworks for Ordinary People to Achieve AI Capability Leap: Say Goodbye to the Dilemma of 'Repeating Inputs Every Day'

marsbit04/22 06:43

活动图片