Claude by Anthropic

A family of foundational AI models

5.0•935 reviews•

70K followers

A family of foundational AI models

5.0•935 reviews•

70K followers

Visit website

LLMs

•

AI Chatbots

We're an AI research company that builds reliable, interpretable, and steerable AI systems. Our first product is Claude, an AI assistant for tasks at any scale.

Claude by Anthropic Reviews

The community submitted 935 reviews to tell us what they like about Claude by Anthropic, what Claude by Anthropic can do better, and more.

5.0

Based on 935 reviews

Review Claude by Anthropic?

"Reviewers mostly see Claude as a strong thinking and coding partner: it handles long context well, stays coherent across multi-step work, writes in a more natural voice than rivals, and often gives useful pushback instead of confidently guessing. Users lean on it for software development, writing, research, analysis, and agentic workflows. Founders of Zapier-scale products rarely add specifics here, but makers of FetchSandbox and others say Claude powers real build and MCP-based workflows. The main complaints are strict usage limits, occasional inconsistency or refusals, weak image features, and a few reports of context loss or risky coding behavior."

+939

Summarized with AI

Pros

AI assistant (107)

code generation (73)

contextual understanding (58)

reasoning capabilities (52)

data analysis (29)

creative writing (28)

fast performance (26)

nuanced responses (23)

ethical AI (20)

user-friendly interface (17)

Cons

message limits (26)

typography issues (10)

contextual understanding (3)

long context windows (3)

cross-surface context sharing (2)

high cost (2)

limited image output (2)

reliable outputs (2)

Pros

Cons

Reviews

All Reviews

Most Informative

Founder Reviews (859)

Other Reviews (76)

used Claude by Anthropic to build FetchSandbox

•4 reviews

What's great

I'm a solo founder, and Claude is on both sides of my company. I build with Claude Code — it's written a real share of FetchSandbox, from the sandbox engine to the deploy scripts — and Claude runs inside the product: it distills real API failures into runnable bug patterns, writes the docs for 60+ API specs, and powers the loop that reproduces a bug and reasons about the fix.

What stands out after months of daily use is that the reasoning holds up on hard, multi-step problems where other models hand-wave. Opus for the deep work, Haiku for the fast paths. And because it speaks MCP, my users' agents call my tools through Claude directly — no glue code. As a one-person team, it's the closest thing I have to a second engineer.

What needs improvement

Only real friction is rate/message limits when I'm deep in a long Claude Code session — I'll be mid-flow on a hard refactor and have to pause. Higher ceilings (or a heads-up before I hit them) for daily power users would make it seamless. Everything else, I don't want changed.

vs Alternatives

Report

46 views18d ago

used Claude by Anthropic to build Konfide

•11 reviews

What's great

data analysis (29)ethical AI (20)contextual understanding (58)reasoning capabilities (52)

I built a full AI agent marketplace in 7 days. Claude was my CPO.

Every product decision, every UX pattern, every Lovable prompt, every edge case, every bug diagnosis, every pitch deck slide, every UAT script, every payment flow, every earnings model, every copy line on the platform went through Claude first.

Claude did not just answer questions. It pushed back when I was wrong. It told me when my assumptions were off. It researched best practices before recommending anything. It helped me think through trust, transparency, and framing for an AI platform that puts human accountability at the center.

I would describe what I wanted. Claude would translate that into a production-grade Lovable prompt, a Supabase migration, an Edge Function spec, or a one-page investor pitch. Sometimes all four in the same conversation.

What surprised me most was not the technical capability. It was the judgment. Claude consistently asked the right question before building the wrong thing. That is what a great CPO does.

Konfide is a solo-founder company. But with Claude as CPO and Lovable as CTO, it does not feel like one. It launches on Product Hunt on April 10. None of it would exist without this stack.

vs Alternatives

I built a full AI agent marketplace in 7 days. Claude was my CPO.

What surprised me most was not the technical capability. It was the judgment. Claude consistently asked the right question before building the wrong thing. That is what a great CPO does.

Konfide is a solo-founder company. But with Claude as CPO and Lovable as CTO, it does not feel like one. It launches on Product Hunt on April 10. None of it would exist without this stack.

Report

316 views4mo ago

used Claude by Anthropic to build Super

•8 reviews

Claude by Anthropic has been instrumental in building Super. The team chose Claude as the primary language model because of its superior reasoning capabilities and contextual understanding. Claude powers Super's core features including cross-platform search, source explanations, and document analysis with remarkable accuracy. The development team made specific prompt engineering improvements for Claude, including better system prompting and JSON handling to maximize its performance. Claude's ability to handle complex queries and provide chain-of-thought reasoning has enabled Super to deliver 8x more relevant results than regular AI search. We considered OpenAI or Gemini, but we use them as fallbacks.

What's great

AI assistant (107)data analysis (29)contextual understanding (58)reasoning capabilities (52)

Report

328 views1yr ago

•13 reviews

What's great

fast performance (26)AI assistant (107)user-friendly interface (17)reliable (12)fast development (5)code generation (73)long context windows (11)promotes critical thinking (2)ethical AI (20)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)nuanced responses (23)reasoning capabilities (52)MCP integration (4)agentic workflow (2)model flexibility (1)claude cowork (4)claude skills (2)

Claude is one of the few AI tools I use almost every day. I switch between Haiku, Sonnet, Opus, depending on the task, from quick drafting to deeper reasoning, coding, research, and product planning.

What stands out is how naturally Claude handles context. Its answers are usually calm, structured, and thoughtful without requiring excessive prompting. Claude Code, Cowork, connectors, MCPs, and Skills have also made it feel like a broader agentic workspace rather than only a chatbot.

The Anthropic team keeps shipping meaningful improvements, and Claude has become one of my most trusted tools for thinking and building.

What needs improvement

message limits (26)conversation search (1)better design output (1)agent observability (1)

Claude is excellent, but long-running workflows still need better continuity. Stronger cross-chat memory and conversation search would make it easier to resume complex work without rebuilding context. I’d also like clearer visibility into what agents did during multi-step tasks, especially when a tool call fails or the result changes unexpectedly.

The growing model lineup is a strength, though clearer task-based guidance would make choosing the right model faster.

vs Alternatives

ChatGPT by OpenAI Gemini

I use several AI tools rather than relying on only one. Claude is usually my first choice for nuanced reasoning, long-context work, clean writing, and understanding complex code or product decisions. ChatGPT is a broader general workspace, while Gemini is useful across Google workflows. Claude stands out when the quality and clarity of the thinking matter most.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

34 views3d ago

•2 reviews

What's great

fast performance (26)code generation (73)data analysis (29)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)reasoning capabilities (52)

Claude Code genuinely changed the way I work. I started coding again after 15 years, and even though I originally began with Cursor, Claude Code became my main tool very quickly.

But the bigger thing is not just coding itself. A huge amount of operational and repetitive work can now be delegated step-by-step to Claude Code. It helps transform ideas into execution much faster and removes a lot of friction from daily workflows. For a technical founder, this is not just “AI coding” — it feels more like an intelligent operational layer for the company.

What needs improvement

The biggest missing piece for me is image generation and image workflow transparency.

I still use ChatGPT or Banana for many visual tasks because the image tooling around Claude is not yet strong enough. I’d especially love better debugging and visibility into what happened during image-related operations.

For example, it would be incredibly useful to have simple controls for things like transparency handling and clearer step-by-step feedback about why a task execution failed. That kind of observability would make the workflow much more reliable for professional use.

vs Alternatives

Codex 3.0 by OpenAI

In my opinion, Claude Code has the strongest “vibe” for modern technical founders working deeply with AI.

There are many strong alternatives — Cursor, Codex, and other AI-native tools — and some are very close technically. But Anthropic keeps shipping system-level improvements and thoughtful UX decisions that make Claude feel consistently ahead.

The product feels opinionated in the right way: less focused on flashy demos, more focused on real workflows, context handling, and long-term productivity. That combination makes it my preferred tool today.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

284 views2mo ago

•11 reviews

What's great

fast performance (26)AI assistant (107)fast development (5)natural language understanding (14)code generation (73)ethical AI (20)contextual understanding (58)reasoning capabilities (52)MCP integration (4)

Claude is one of my go-to AI tools for software development, architecture discussions, code reviews, and long-form reasoning. It excels at understanding large codebases, explaining complex concepts clearly, and producing thoughtful, well-structured responses. I especially value its ability to maintain context during longer technical conversations, making it a reliable partner for both development and problem-solving.

What needs improvement

message limits (26)

The biggest improvements I'd like to see are higher message limits, better conversation search, stronger project memory across sessions, and expanded image generation/editing capabilities. Deeper integrations with developer tools and more flexible collaboration features would also make it even more valuable for technical workflows.

vs Alternatives

ChatGPT by OpenAI

I regularly use ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, DeepSeek, and other AI models. I chose Claude because of its strong reasoning abilities, excellent handling of long documents and code, and its clear, natural writing style. Each model has strengths, but Claude is often my first choice for architecture planning and complex technical tasks.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

165 views1mo ago

•1 review

What's great

code generation (73)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)reasoning capabilities (52)

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the backbone of our entire platform, Humans.Team. Over 85 development sessions, Claude Code (powered by Sonnet) built 90% of our Next.js application — from Supabase database architecture and Row Level Security policies to AI journal integration, real-time notifications, PWA offline support, and a bilingual FR/EN system across 30+ pages.

What sets Sonnet 4.6 apart is its ability to hold deep context across long sessions. It remembers architectural decisions from hours ago, understands our codebase patterns, and writes production-ready TypeScript that rarely needs fixing. The reasoning is exceptional — it debugs complex issues by tracing through multiple files and connections.

We also use Claude Desktop daily for content strategy, press releases, blog articles, and bilingual copywriting. The nuance in both French and English is remarkable.

What needs improvement

Context window limits can be frustrating during very long sessions — the conversation gets compressed and some earlier decisions are lost. Also, occasional over-eagerness to add unnecessary abstractions or comments when a simple fix is all that is needed. But these are minor compared to the massive value it delivers daily.

vs Alternatives

We evaluated ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, and Gemini. Claude won on three fronts: superior code quality with fewer hallucinations, exceptional long-context understanding (critical for our 85+ session codebase), and genuinely better bilingual output in French and English. The Claude Code CLI is a game-changer — it reads files, edits code, runs commands, and thinks through problems autonomously. Nothing else comes close for building a full-stack application from vision to production.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

934 views5mo ago

•2 reviews

What's great

AI assistant (107)context aware (13)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)claude cowork (4)claude skills (2)

I work a 9-to-5, run a content business, and I'm in a medical residency. Without some sort of AI assistance doing all three without burning out would be basically impossible. Claude wasn't the first thing I tried (I started using AI since before ChatGPT was a thing, back when you had to go on OpenAI Playground) but so far it has been the best thing. The personal productivity wins, especially from Claude Cowork, are just unprecedented. On the content side, it has been the best at understanding my style and the context of the work and drafting like a human. On running my Instagram page alone, I believe it saves me 10+ hours per week, helping me with everything from maintaining a content calendar to creating draft scripts based on loose ideas + my actual style and voice.

What needs improvement

limited image output (2)

The limitations on image output and image generation are the only thing I can think of

vs Alternatives

ChatGPT by OpenAI Gemini

Gemini

For marketing, nothing even comes close to the output quality of Claude. For writing, I believe it's a combination of solid context awareness and just better, more natural writing skills. But the real game-changer for productivity is Claude Cowork (and eventually Claude Code, I would think, but so far Cowork is what I use) as a desktop agent with local access. Gemini doesn't have that, OpenAI's option seems much more limited and less user-friendly

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

84 views2mo ago

•5 reviews

What's great

AI assistant (107)code generation (73)data analysis (29)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)

The contextual understanding is on another level. It actually holds the thread across a long conversation and responds like it grasped the nuance, not just the surface of what you asked. For writing, analysis, and working through complex problems, nothing else comes close right now.

What needs improvement

message limits (26)

The message limits are the biggest frustration. You hit a wall right in the middle of deep work and have to wait, which completely kills the flow. The typography in responses could also be cleaner. And some form of context sharing across conversations would make it significantly more powerful for ongoing projects.

vs Alternatives

Used ChatGPT for a long time and still keep it around. But Claude handles longer context better and the responses feel more thoughtful and less generic. For anything requiring careful reasoning or careful writing, Claude wins pretty consistently.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

153 views2mo ago

•5 reviews

What's great

AI assistant (107)code generation (73)

My daily driver. I use Claude for pretty much everything — coding, infra work, research, drafting — and it's the tool I reach for first every single day. What sets it apart for me is that it actually follows through on real, multi-step work instead of just answering a prompt, and it plugs into my workflow through MCP so it can pull data and act, not just talk. The code quality and the reasoning on messy, open-ended problems are the reasons it stuck.

What needs improvement

message limits (26)

The one thing I'd change is the usage limits — even on the Max plan I sometimes hit them on heavy days. I get the economics behind it (this kind of compute isn't cheap, and I'd rather they keep it sustainable than degrade quality), so it's more a wish than a real complaint. A bit more headroom, or clearer visibility into how close I am to the limit, would smooth it out.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

15 views13d ago

•1 review

What's great

fast performance (26)AI assistant (107)user-friendly interface (17)fast development (5)code generation (73)ethical AI (20)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)reasoning capabilities (52)

This is my personal response. I left a platform where I was top 10% global user and top 1% messages sent globally. My experience with Claude over the last two months has far much exceeded what was capable on other platforms.

I love the no nonsense UI experience.

The experience has been so great, I have literally forgot about the other one in daily use. Especially for coding.

Claude has helped me deliver the type of service and products I dreamed of doing 12 years ago.

I actually look forward to coming and building with Claude.

It understands it is assistant quite well.

What needs improvement

message limits (26)

Now, I have to say this part frustrated me the most. For creative minds, to see that pop up in the middle of a prompt is just next level frustrating. So much it took my focus momentarily to search it up. That was the one time I remember recently thinking about “I was never treated this way on paid subscription on the other one. Was I?” So yeah. Need to do something about that. I know I’m not the only one thinking that because there are conversations out there specifically about this.

That’s the only thing for me right now.

vs Alternatives

ChatGPT by OpenAI

Because it catches the vision for the type of builds I am committed to: clean, minimalist, and elegant.

Prompt output is spot on most time.

Code is clean and doesn’t have to constantly be cleaned up.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

295 views3mo ago

•2 reviews

What's great

code generation (73)long context windows (11)ethical AI (20)contextual understanding (58)nuanced responses (23)reasoning capabilities (52)reliable outputs (10)

I rebuilt a 2011 iOS app solo in 90 days using Claude Code as my primary development partner. I'm a salesperson by trade, not an engineer. Claude made that possible. It holds context across long sessions better than any other model I've tested, and it pushes back when your approach is wrong rather than just executing bad instructions. That intellectual honesty is what separates it. My app ships to the App Store this month. Claude built most of it.

What needs improvement

reliable outputs (2)

Response style and verbosity shift unpredictably between versions. I've had to retrain my prompting approach more than once as the model has evolved. More consistency across updates would reduce friction for power users with established workflows.

vs Alternatives

ChatGPT by OpenAI Gemini

Gemini

ChatGPT and Gemini. Both capable, neither matched Claude's ability to reason through a complex codebase and maintain context across a long build. Claude Code specifically is in a different category for serious development wor

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

18 views20d ago

•1 review

What's great

AI assistant (107)user-friendly interface (17)context aware (13)natural language understanding (14)data analysis (29)contextual understanding (58)creative writing (28)nuanced responses (23)reasoning capabilities (52)

Claude has fast become an irreplaceable sidekick (or mastermind, but what do I know?) to both my personal life and startup.

I particularly enjoy its ability to understand and recall context from different chats, making it a lot easier to continue your thought process without stopping to remind it on background information.

Claude replies also come with nuance and warmth, making it feel a lot more natural without being overly pleasing.

What needs improvement

message limits (26)

Pricing

While it has a lot of merits, I'd like Claude to be more transparent about what it thinks I need regarding subscription plan. Instead of a trial-and-error process, it would be helpful for Claude to estimate what is required and suggest which level of subscription I should get on. Having used Claude for a few months now, I believe there is enough data for Claude to make suggestions.

I'd happily accept the risk that Claude over-estimates my credit needs, rather than having to guess – only to hit a wall when you're in the flow.

Onboarding

There is a lot of discussion about how Claude works differently than ChatGPT and other platforms. For ease of migration, it's worth considering having some of those differences (and how a user should adapt) be part of the UI – instead of only living in the docs.

vs Alternatives

ChatGPT by OpenAI

Perplexity for Mac

Claude has the best answers (except for research, where Perplexity is still better) that balances empathy and diversity of thoughts. It also remembers previous contexts, and overall makes it easy to create dedicated spaces for each projects.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

341 views4mo ago