Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 4.5

anthropic.com

121–130 of 525 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#121
post #87
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

15$/Megatoken in, 75$/Megatoken out

Sigh, ok, I’m the defective one here.

There's so many moving pieces in this mess. We'll normalize on some 'standard' eventually, but for now, it's hard, man.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#122

I'm curious if others are finding that there's a comfort in staying within the Claude ecosystem because when it makes a mistake, we get used to spotting the pattern. I'm finding that when I try new models, their "stupid" moments are more surprising and infuriating. Given this tech is new, the experience of how we relate to their mistakes is something I think a bit about. Am I alone here, are others finding themselves…

I guess you where not around a few months back when they over-optimized and served a degraded model for weeks.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only Claude Code has been able to really solve; Sonnet 4.5 in there consistently performs better than Sonnet 4.5 anywhere else. I think part of it is this[0] and I expect it will become more of a problem. Claude models have built-in tools (e.g. `str_replace_editor`) which they've been trained to use. These tools don't exist in Cursor, but claude really wants to use them. 0 - https://x.com/thisritchie/status/1944038…

TIL! I'll finally give Claude Code a try. I've been using Cursor since it launched and never tried anything else. The terminal UI didn't appeal to me, but knowing it has better performance, I'll check it out. Cursor has been a terrible experience lately, regardless of the model. Sometimes for the same task, I need to try with Sonnet 4.5, ChatGPT 5.1 Codex, Gemini Pro 3... and most times, none managed to do the work,…

You can install the Claude Code VS Code extension in Cursor and you get a similar AI side pane as the main Cursor composer.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#124

again the question of concern as codex user is usage its hard to get any meaningful use out of claude pro after you ship a few features you are pretty much out of weekly usage compared to what codex-5.1-max offers on a plan that is 5x cheaper the 4~5% improvement is welcome but honestly i question whether its possible to get meaningful usage out of it the way codex allows it for most use cases medium or 4.5 handles t…

Well, that's where the price reduction comes in handy, no?

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#125
post #86
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pricing is now $5/$25 per million tokens For anyone else confused, it's input/output tokens $5 for 1million tokens in $25 for 1million tokens out

What prevents these jokers from making their outputs ludicrously verbose to squeeze more out of you, given they charge 5x more for the end that they control? Already model outputs are overly verbose, and I can see this getting worse as they try to squeeze some margin. Especially given that many of the tools conveniently hide most of the output.

You would stop using their model and move to their competitors, presumably.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#126
post #95
post #5

Seeing these benchmarks makes me so happy. Not because I love Anthropic (I do like them) but because it's staving off me having to change my Coding Agent. This world is changing fast, and both keeping up with State of the Art and/or the feeling of FOMO is exhausting. Ive been holding onto Claude Code for the last little while since Ive built up a robust set of habits, slash commands, and sub agents that help me squee…

I’m threw a few hours at Codex the other day and was incredibly disappointed with the outcome… I’m a heavy Claude code user and similar workloads just didn’t work out well for me on Codex. One of the areas I think is going to make a big difference to any model soon is speed. We can build error correcting systems into the tools - but the base models need more speed (and obviously with that lower costs)

Any experience w/ Haiku-4.5? Your "heavy Claude code user" and "speed" comment gave me hope you might have insights. TIA

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#127
post #5

Seeing these benchmarks makes me so happy. Not because I love Anthropic (I do like them) but because it's staving off me having to change my Coding Agent. This world is changing fast, and both keeping up with State of the Art and/or the feeling of FOMO is exhausting. Ive been holding onto Claude Code for the last little while since Ive built up a robust set of habits, slash commands, and sub agents that help me squee…

With Cursor or Copilot+VSCode, you get all the models, can switch any time. When a new model is announced its available same day.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#128
post #60

The burying of the lede here is insane. $5/$25 per MTok is a 3x price drop from Opus 4. At that price point, Opus stops being "the model you use for important things" and becomes actually viable for production workloads. Also notable: they're claiming SOTA prompt injection resistance. The industry has largely given up on solving this problem through training alone, so if the numbers in the system card hold up under a…

This is also super relevant for everyone who had ditched Claude Code due to limits: > For Claude and Claude Code users with access to Opus 4.5, we’ve removed Opus-specific caps. For Max and Team Premium users, we’ve increased overall usage limits, meaning you’ll have roughly the same number of Opus tokens as you previously had with Sonnet. We’re updating usage limits to make sure you’re able to use Opus 4.5 for daily…

Now THAT is great news

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#129

The burying of the lede here is insane. $5/$25 per MTok is a 3x price drop from Opus 4. At that price point, Opus stops being "the model you use for important things" and becomes actually viable for production workloads. Also notable: they're claiming SOTA prompt injection resistance. The industry has largely given up on solving this problem through training alone, so if the numbers in the system card hold up under a…

3x price drop almost certainly means Opus 4.5 is a different and smaller base model than Opus 4.1, with more fine tuning to target the benchmarks.

I'll be curious to see how performance compares to Opus 4.1 on the kind of tasks and metrics they're not explicitly targeting, e.g. eqbench.com

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#130

It's really hard for me to take these benchmarks seriously at all, especially that first one where Sonnet 4.5 is better at software engineering than Opus 4.1. It is emphatically not, it has never been, I have used both models extensively and I have never encountered a single situation where Sonnet did a better job than Opus. Any coding benchmark that has Sonnet above Opus is broken, or at the very least measuring thi…

These announcements and "upgrades" are becoming increasingly pointless. No one is going to notice this. The improvements are questionable and inconsistent. They could swap it out for an older model and no one would notice.
Post reply on HN