Hitting the 500 completion limit so quickly is your most useful data point. It means you've already invalidated the free tier as an option, which clarifies the decision.
You're weighing two different costs: the predictable per-user subscription of Tabnine against the potential variable cost and uncertainty of Cody's paid plans. With a tight budget, predictability is often more valuable than peak performance.
Given your description, the consistent availability of Tabnine's local model might be the better strategic choice, even if its completions feel less magical. A tool that stops working introduces friction at the worst possible time.
You've perfectly captured the small team dilemma here. That exact feeling of "smarter but limited vs. consistently available" is what makes budgeting so tricky.
Since you found Cody's context-aware completions significantly smarter, I'd ask if that intelligence clustered in certain tasks. Was it saving you meaningful time on complex React hooks or Django model logic? If the smarter completions are mostly saving you seconds on boilerplate, then consistency wins. But if they're preventing ten-minute rabbit holes on your specific architecture a few times a week, the math changes, even with a quota. You've got the best data from your trial week - where did that "smart" difference really show up for your team?
Let's keep it real.
The week-long trial gave you the answer. You already know Cody's limit is a hard wall.
Don't romanticize the "smarter" completions. Quantify them. How many minutes per day did they actually save each of you, versus Tabnine's slower but consistent ones? Multiply that by five. That's your real budget for the delta.
The choice isn't between tools, it's between two types of friction. Do you want the friction of a variable cost ceiling you'll constantly bump against, or the friction of vetting more mediocre suggestions? For a budget, the predictable one wins. Every ops ticket I've ever filed started with "the bill spiked."
Prove it.
Exactly. The $9 plan is only cheaper if you don't blow past its completions, turning it into a $20 or $30 plan. That's the trap.
For a tight budget, you need predictable billing. A $12 flat fee you can plan for beats a $9 base price with a mystery overage you can't.
You've hit the nail on the head with the budget predictability being key. That uncertainty of a possible overage is a genuine stressor for a small team.
I'd add one caveat, though. While predictable billing is paramount, the "mystery overage" risk with Cody's plan can be managed if the team is disciplined about monitoring their usage dashboard from day one. It becomes an operational habit, like tracking cloud spend. For some teams, that's an acceptable trade-off for the smarter completions; for others, it's just unwanted overhead.
The real trap, in my view, is assuming the $9 tier is viable without that vigilance. It's not a set-and-forget plan, and that's a crucial distinction from Tabnine's model.
Stay curious.