{"slug": "amped-up", "title": "Amped up", "summary": "Developer Adam Wathan predicts that within six months, AI coding models will become commoditized, comparing them to gas at a gas station. Amp, an AI coding tool, has switched its default model from Opus to Sol without user complaints, and now supports ChatGPT subscriptions, reducing usage costs. The author praises Amp's user experience and cloud-based Orbs setup, while noting a preference for faster feedback over excessive verification.", "body_md": "I’ve switched to Amp full time for all of my build things needs. I used to swing between Claude Code, Codex, and Amp. Amp was always my favorite, but the usage pricing was too restricting to have it as my default.\n\nI didn’t want to commit to one model/provider to get an understanding what their strengths and weaknesses are. Sure, there were some differences. I preferred Codex over Claude for UI tasks, and Claude over Codex for heavy thinking. But with the latest iterations of Opus & GPT? The differences are fading away.\n\nQuoting [Adam Wathan](https://x.com/adamwathan/status/2085154641575100492): *“Feels like we’re about 6 months away from a token is a token is a token. Just gas at the gas station.”* Amp [switched their default model from Opus to Sol overnight](https://ampcode.com/news/who-cares-about-the-model) without saying anything. No one complained. I’m at a point where I don’t care about which model I’m using. I *do* care about the user experience, and Amp is way ahead the competition there.\n\nI love Amp for it’s clarity (both in output language and UI) and that it just works. I don’t feel like I need to spend time configuring it too much to use it. Amp also got me into running agents in the cloud, because their Orbs setup make it seamless.\n\nAs of last month, you can use your [ChatGPT](https://ampcode.com/news/subscriptions) subscription in Amp. This gets rid of most usage costs (you only pay when Amp decides to use a non-OpenAI model, which is rare).\n\nMy biggest gripe with Amp (although I’ve heard about this problem with LLMs in general) is the *obsession* with verification. When you’re throwing a task at your agent this is a good thing. But when you’re having a back-and-forth coding session it can be a nuisance. Do I have to wait on an end-to-end test suit and compiler check because I asked to change the emoji in the footer? I prefer fast feedback from the agent since 90% of the time the verification turns out to be all clear. And if it isn’t, CI stands ready as the last line of defense.\n\nThis seems to have improved since I’ve set up my Amp-specific `AGENTS.md`\n\n:\n\n- Only run tests, typechecks, verifications, etc. when working on big chunks of work, not small tasks like updating display values.\n- Don’t add unit tests for local presentational changes, like renaming a label in a specific form, or reordering table columns.\n\nAmp is the first harnass to give me a coding experience in the new age that makes me *want* to be there. My next step? Drop the decade-old habit of defaulting to local developmen. Orbs, orbs, orbs.", "url": "https://wpnews.pro/news/amped-up", "canonical_source": "https://sebastiandedeyne.com/amped-up", "published_at": "2026-08-10 07:00:07+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-08-10 07:51:28.757605+00:00", "lang": "en", "topics": ["ai-tools", "generative-ai", "large-language-models", "developer-tools"], "entities": ["Amp", "Claude Code", "Codex", "Opus", "Sol", "ChatGPT", "Adam Wathan"], "alternates": {"html": "https://wpnews.pro/news/amped-up", "markdown": "https://wpnews.pro/news/amped-up.md", "text": "https://wpnews.pro/news/amped-up.txt", "jsonld": "https://wpnews.pro/news/amped-up.jsonld"}}