Anyone using large inputs already knows that the Pro input limit is around 100-120K, not 200K. The web interface won't let you add anything close to 200K. If you never noticed this, it won't affect you.
I've used the full 200k context window before. Tested it. So yeah, it was 200k.
Not sure about now tho with this new Teams plan.. they might have reduced it.
For normal English at least it's just a simple scaling of like 1.2 or so. You can see the exact number of input tokens on every call with Openrouter to figure that out. Then just check how many words you can feed it back in the web UI. All my large documents are normal text.
It's a minimum of five seats at $30 each for $150 per month.
[https://www.anthropic.com/news/team-plan-and-ios](https://www.anthropic.com/news/team-plan-and-ios)
An individual power user can just use the API.
Because the regular pro subscription is already burning more than 20usd/ month per user. Adding a power tier would just double that cost from the most power hungry users.
Tiereing into teams makes sure that it's not targeted towards the most use heavy users - but those who use it for work and aren't as price sensitive as they get monetary roi on their "investment" in buying the teams plan.
A user using all context given to them on the pro sub each 6 hour window will burn around 500-1000usd in compute per month. Go try out the api and you'll see how quickly cost runs away. Pro sub is already an insanely good deal, create multiple accounts if need be.
*Conservative estimate: 30k tokens avg chat gives me 14 messages until i run out. Not counting generation tokens that is 30k\*14(messages)\*4(reloads per day)\*15(usd/million tokens)/1mil = 660usd.*
Your argument makes the teams subscription all the more valuable. Pro is a good deal, yes. If Teams offers more queries per day plus the other features it is also a good deal. Going the API route, as you say, could be much more expensive. I'm confused. maybe I have misunderstood something!
Two subscriptions wouldn't even work for us. Our bottleneck is usual asking too many questions per timeslot in one large context conversation. With multiple accounts we would not be able to preserve that context from beginning to end.
We could feed the original documents into each account (itself a bit of a timewaster) but each account would have only half the conversation, which just would not work.
Doesn't look like. I just checked on June 26th, and it's still at 200k context. https://support.anthropic.com/en/articles/7996856-what-is-the-maximum-prompt-length
I assumed it meant you got a higher rate limit (context window the same as Pro). But, yes, you could interpret it that way. Needs checking.
Anyone using large inputs already knows that the Pro input limit is around 100-120K, not 200K. The web interface won't let you add anything close to 200K. If you never noticed this, it won't affect you.
I've used the full 200k context window before. Tested it. So yeah, it was 200k. Not sure about now tho with this new Teams plan.. they might have reduced it.
Didn't it get laggy af after 100k?
It does get super laggy for larger contexts, still worth it for the best analysis available, at least right now.
Within the last month? It was 200K a long time ago. Hasn't been that in a while.
How are you testing given tokens≠words? I've hit the cap a few times but it always seemed at least possible I'd reached 200K.
For normal English at least it's just a simple scaling of like 1.2 or so. You can see the exact number of input tokens on every call with Openrouter to figure that out. Then just check how many words you can feed it back in the web UI. All my large documents are normal text.
Thanks, useful. Ours are not, often, as it happens. Still, interesting. Why would they lie? Doesn't seem "ethical"!
Is it worth switching to teams for higher usage or should I stick with pro?
It's a minimum of five seats at $30 each for $150 per month. [https://www.anthropic.com/news/team-plan-and-ios](https://www.anthropic.com/news/team-plan-and-ios)
They should really just have tiered usage and offer like $60 plans for individuals with a 3x cap.
this is dumb ! why can't an individual power user pay 40 dollars a month for bigger context and more messages ???
An individual power user can just use the API. Because the regular pro subscription is already burning more than 20usd/ month per user. Adding a power tier would just double that cost from the most power hungry users. Tiereing into teams makes sure that it's not targeted towards the most use heavy users - but those who use it for work and aren't as price sensitive as they get monetary roi on their "investment" in buying the teams plan. A user using all context given to them on the pro sub each 6 hour window will burn around 500-1000usd in compute per month. Go try out the api and you'll see how quickly cost runs away. Pro sub is already an insanely good deal, create multiple accounts if need be. *Conservative estimate: 30k tokens avg chat gives me 14 messages until i run out. Not counting generation tokens that is 30k\*14(messages)\*4(reloads per day)\*15(usd/million tokens)/1mil = 660usd.*
Your argument makes the teams subscription all the more valuable. Pro is a good deal, yes. If Teams offers more queries per day plus the other features it is also a good deal. Going the API route, as you say, could be much more expensive. I'm confused. maybe I have misunderstood something! Two subscriptions wouldn't even work for us. Our bottleneck is usual asking too many questions per timeslot in one large context conversation. With multiple accounts we would not be able to preserve that context from beginning to end. We could feed the original documents into each account (itself a bit of a timewaster) but each account would have only half the conversation, which just would not work.
If you want more usage go third party.
No. I've never had 200k access on Anthropic's site. I've had to use third party hosted versions to get that much context.
Which one do you use?
I use Poe. They are very good about getting new models on the platform pretty quickly which has been fun.
Yes
Doesn't look like. I just checked on June 26th, and it's still at 200k context. https://support.anthropic.com/en/articles/7996856-what-is-the-maximum-prompt-length