Command Code's banner

Command Code

@CommandCodeAI • 21,351 subscribers

Command Code with taste; the first coding agent purpose built for open models, tool call repairs, /design skill, #1/#2 leaderboards, and $1 Go plan 10x credits.

Shorts

We ran a test between the new DeepSeek V4 Flash, Kimi K3 and GLM 5.2. 3 open models. 1 prompt. /design command Reviewed gameplay features, UX/UI and cost. 🔹 Kimi K3 → 9.5/10 · $0.0740 🔹 GLM 5.2 → 9/10 · $0.0480 🔹 DeepSeek V4 Flash → 7/10 · $0.0005 DeepSeek V4 Flash is ~150x cheaper, but rough around edges. Kimi K3 and GLM 5.2 built the most polished gaming experience.

We ran a test between the new DeepSeek V4 Flash, Kimi K3 and GLM 5.2. 3 open models. 1 prompt. /design command Reviewed gameplay features, UX/UI and cost. 🔹 Kimi K3 → 9.5/10 · $0.0740 🔹 GLM 5.2 → 9/10 · $0.0480 🔹 DeepSeek V4 Flash → 7/10 · $0.0005 DeepSeek V4 Flash is ~150x cheaper, but rough around edges. Kimi K3 and GLM 5.2 built the most polished gaming experience.

167,504 次观看

Tested Muse Spark 1.2, Kimi K3, and GLM 5.2 with our FlappyBench 3 models, same prompt with the /design command. Reviewed gameplay features, UX/UI, and cost. 🔹 Kimi K3 → 9.5/10 · $0.0740 🔹 GLM 5.2 → 9/10 · $0.0480 🔹 Muse Spark 1.2 → 8/10 · $0.0187 Muse Spark 1.2 delivered a completely different game style despite being super cheap. Kimi K3 and GLM 5.2 outputs are comparable and close in cost.

Tested Muse Spark 1.2, Kimi K3, and GLM 5.2 with our FlappyBench 3 models, same prompt with the /design command. Reviewed gameplay features, UX/UI, and cost. 🔹 Kimi K3 → 9.5/10 · $0.0740 🔹 GLM 5.2 → 9/10 · $0.0480 🔹 Muse Spark 1.2 → 8/10 · $0.0187 Muse Spark 1.2 delivered a completely different game style despite being super cheap. Kimi K3 and GLM 5.2 outputs are comparable and close in cost.

23,241 次观看

T-5 𝚝𝚊𝚜𝚝𝚎 coming to your terminal.

T-5 𝚝𝚊𝚜𝚝𝚎 coming to your terminal.

25,705 次观看

Step 3.7 Flash is one of the fastest low-cost open models, now live in Command Code. • 400 tokens/sec 🍃 • 256K context window • 3 reasoning levels Sharp instruction-following and strong /design taste. $1 Go plan with 10x free usage credits, best way to try it.

Step 3.7 Flash is one of the fastest low-cost open models, now live in Command Code. • 400 tokens/sec 🍃 • 256K context window • 3 reasoning levels Sharp instruction-following and strong /design taste. $1 Go plan with 10x free usage credits, best way to try it.

11,484 次观看

Videos

Anya Rossi

sweetdream.ai

SweetDream.ai•Sponsored•Livecam

Watch Anya Live

Anya is streaming live right now! Join her private show and enjoy exclusive content.

Exclusive private shows

1.2k viewers online

Private Show

Join now for exclusive access

Free preview available • Premium content

Fable 5 vs Grok 4.5 vs GPT 5.5 We put three top-tier models to build a same game challenge. Used Command Code /design, and the exact same prompt. Result: Grok 4.5 genuinely plays like a polished mobile game. Fable 5 and GPT 5.5 feel too fast. Everything feels rushed, lacks finish. Ranking based on DX & Features: → Grok 4.5: 9/10 → Fable 5: 7.5/10 → GPT 5.5: 7/10

Fable 5 vs Grok 4.5 vs GPT 5.5 We put three top-tier models to build a same game challenge. Used Command Code /design, and the exact same prompt. Result: Grok 4.5 genuinely plays like a polished mobile game. Fable 5 and GPT 5.5 feel too fast. Everything feels rushed, lacks finish. Ranking based on DX & Features: → Grok 4.5: 9/10 → Fable 5: 7.5/10 → GPT 5.5: 7/10

912,752 次观看 • 2 个月前

Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5 Three top-tier models. Same /design prompt across all. Parameters reviewed: Pace, design sense, gameplay feel Result: Kimi K3 nails the design sense and knows exactly what to add in-game. Pace and gameplay held up well. Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol both play too fast, video isn't sped up. Ranking (DX, Features & Cost): → Kimi K3: 9.5/10 · $0.030 → Fable 5: 7.5/10 · $0.38 → GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 · $0.11

Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5 Three top-tier models. Same /design prompt across all. Parameters reviewed: Pace, design sense, gameplay feel Result: Kimi K3 nails the design sense and knows exactly what to add in-game. Pace and gameplay held up well. Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol both play too fast, video isn't sped up. Ranking (DX, Features & Cost): → Kimi K3: 9.5/10 · $0.030 → Fable 5: 7.5/10 · $0.38 → GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 · $0.11

377,252 次观看 • 1 个月前

Ran FlappyBench on DeepSeek V4.1-Flash, GLM 5.3, and Kimi K3 with the same /design prompt. 🔹 DSV4.1-Flash: 9/10 · $0.0089 one-shot with the lowest cost 🔹 GLM-5.3: 9.5/10 · $0.0184 · nailed the UI but cost 2x more 🔹 Kimi K3: 8/10 · $0.0740 · hard-coded gameplay and 8x more

Ran FlappyBench on DeepSeek V4.1-Flash, GLM 5.3, and Kimi K3 with the same /design prompt. 🔹 DSV4.1-Flash: 9/10 · $0.0089 one-shot with the lowest cost 🔹 GLM-5.3: 9.5/10 · $0.0184 · nailed the UI but cost 2x more 🔹 Kimi K3: 8/10 · $0.0740 · hard-coded gameplay and 8x more

18,397 次观看 • 2 天前

We ran a test between the new Qwen3.8-Max, Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol. 3 models. same prompt. one-shot with the /design command. Reviewed gameplay features, UX/UI and cost. 🔹 Qwen3.8-Max → 9/10 · $0.0248 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol → 9/10 · $0.150 🔹 Opus 5 → 8.5/10 · $0.253 Qwen3.8-Max is approximately 4.2× cheaper than GPT-5.6, Sol, Opus 5 and has the same level of UI, UX, and gameplay.

We ran a test between the new Qwen3.8-Max, Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol. 3 models. same prompt. one-shot with the /design command. Reviewed gameplay features, UX/UI and cost. 🔹 Qwen3.8-Max → 9/10 · $0.0248 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol → 9/10 · $0.150 🔹 Opus 5 → 8.5/10 · $0.253 Qwen3.8-Max is approximately 4.2× cheaper than GPT-5.6, Sol, Opus 5 and has the same level of UI, UX, and gameplay.

179,535 次观看 • 1 个月前

Ran FlappyBench on Muse Spark 1.3, Gemini 3.8 Flash, and Grok-4.6 with the same /design prompt. 🔹 Muse Spark 1.3: 9/10 · $0.072. Nailed UI in 2 iterations with lowest cost 🔹 Grok-4.6: 9/10 · $0.095 · Matched Muse’s output, but cost 2x more 🔹 Gemini 3.8 Flash: 7/10 · $0.205 · Most expensive and not fully finished

Ran FlappyBench on Muse Spark 1.3, Gemini 3.8 Flash, and Grok-4.6 with the same /design prompt. 🔹 Muse Spark 1.3: 9/10 · $0.072. Nailed UI in 2 iterations with lowest cost 🔹 Grok-4.6: 9/10 · $0.095 · Matched Muse’s output, but cost 2x more 🔹 Gemini 3.8 Flash: 7/10 · $0.205 · Most expensive and not fully finished

36,392 次观看 • 11 天前

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5 vs Grok 4.5 Built a car racing game with a UX-over-UI focus, using /design command. Parameters we reviewed: Car speed, crash behavior, scoring, smoothness, and feel. Results: Grok 4.5: best overall performance Fable 5: a close second, nearly matching Grok 4.5 GPT-5.6 Sol: great UI, weak gameplay (excess drift and friction) Ranking (based on actual gameplay): - Grok 4.5: 9/10 - Fable 5: 8/10 - GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 (UI was 10/10, gameplay wasn't)

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5 vs Grok 4.5 Built a car racing game with a UX-over-UI focus, using /design command. Parameters we reviewed: Car speed, crash behavior, scoring, smoothness, and feel. Results: Grok 4.5: best overall performance Fable 5: a close second, nearly matching Grok 4.5 GPT-5.6 Sol: great UI, weak gameplay (excess drift and friction) Ranking (based on actual gameplay): - Grok 4.5: 9/10 - Fable 5: 8/10 - GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 (UI was 10/10, gameplay wasn't)

79,680 次观看 • 2 个月前

We ran a test between GPT-5.6 Sol, Kimi K3, and Gemini 3.6 Flash. One prompt. Across all three models. Using our /design command. Results (gameplay, UX, and UI): 🔹 Kimi K3 performed well across all three. 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol is good, but it gets annoying when the ball hits the wall. 🔹 Gemini 3.6 Flash is bad (took 5–6 attempts), but it has features the others don’t, like dropping coins for power-up balls and increasing the bar length. Ranking (DX, features, and cost): 🔹 Kimi K3: 10/10 · $0.10 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol: 9/10 · $0.52 🔹 Gemini 3.6 Flash: 6/10 · $0.45

We ran a test between GPT-5.6 Sol, Kimi K3, and Gemini 3.6 Flash. One prompt. Across all three models. Using our /design command. Results (gameplay, UX, and UI): 🔹 Kimi K3 performed well across all three. 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol is good, but it gets annoying when the ball hits the wall. 🔹 Gemini 3.6 Flash is bad (took 5–6 attempts), but it has features the others don’t, like dropping coins for power-up balls and increasing the bar length. Ranking (DX, features, and cost): 🔹 Kimi K3: 10/10 · $0.10 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol: 9/10 · $0.52 🔹 Gemini 3.6 Flash: 6/10 · $0.45

61,412 次观看 • 1 个月前

Text-only models now have vision in Command Code. • A vision model reads the attached image • Your main model gets the context in the same thread • /config lets you choose the vision model Stop describing screenshots. Just attach them.

Text-only models now have vision in Command Code. • A vision model reads the attached image • Your main model gets the context in the same thread • /config lets you choose the vision model Stop describing screenshots. Just attach them.

19,192 次观看 • 24 天前

Tested FlappyBench with GLM 5.3, Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol 3 models. Same prompt with /design command. Scored on features, UX/UI, and cost. 🔹 Fable 5 → 9.5/10 · $0.420 🔹 GLM 5.3 → 9/10 · $0.018 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol → 9/10 · $0.150 Results: → Fable 5 wins on quality, but costs 23x more than GLM 5.3 → GLM 5.3 gives better output than GPT 5.6 Sol at 8x cheaper → Optimizing for cost? Go for GLM 5.3. Otherwise, Fable 5 if quality matters

Tested FlappyBench with GLM 5.3, Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol 3 models. Same prompt with /design command. Scored on features, UX/UI, and cost. 🔹 Fable 5 → 9.5/10 · $0.420 🔹 GLM 5.3 → 9/10 · $0.018 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol → 9/10 · $0.150 Results: → Fable 5 wins on quality, but costs 23x more than GLM 5.3 → GLM 5.3 gives better output than GPT 5.6 Sol at 8x cheaper → Optimizing for cost? Go for GLM 5.3. Otherwise, Fable 5 if quality matters

22,827 次观看 • 1 个月前

Writing tests is now the easiest part of your workflow. Pick a file, and Command Code will: - Analyze the code - Generate the right test cases - Run the test suite - Resolve failures - Re-run until all tests pass Try it on a file that hasn’t been tested yet.

Writing tests is now the easiest part of your workflow. Pick a file, and Command Code will: - Analyze the code - Generate the right test cases - Run the test suite - Resolve failures - Re-run until all tests pass Try it on a file that hasn’t been tested yet.

20,517 次观看 • 29 天前

We ran a test between Opus 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, and Kimi K3. One prompt. Across all three models. With our /design command. Results: We reviewed gameplay, UX, and UI 🔹 Opus 5 is strong UI + motion, best gameplay 🔹 Kimi K3 has solid design and gameplay 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol has best UI, worse gameplay Ranking (DX, features, and cost): 🔹 Opus 5: 10/10 · $0.25 🔹 Kimi K3: 9.5/10 · $0.12 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 · $0.32

We ran a test between Opus 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, and Kimi K3. One prompt. Across all three models. With our /design command. Results: We reviewed gameplay, UX, and UI 🔹 Opus 5 is strong UI + motion, best gameplay 🔹 Kimi K3 has solid design and gameplay 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol has best UI, worse gameplay Ranking (DX, features, and cost): 🔹 Opus 5: 10/10 · $0.25 🔹 Kimi K3: 9.5/10 · $0.12 🔹 GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 · $0.32

24,686 次观看 • 1 个月前

New in v0.40.0 ⋅ /fork Fork new sessions from current context The original stays intact. /resume returns you to the original. Try different directions without breaking your sessions.

New in v0.40.0 ⋅ /fork Fork new sessions from current context The original stays intact. /resume returns you to the original. Try different directions without breaking your sessions.

17,583 次观看 • 2 个月前

没有更多内容可加载