Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Opus 4.5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 525 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#131

Post by victor9000 »

UltraSane wrote: post #63
827a wrote: post #12

I've played around with Gemini 3 Pro in Cursor, and honestly: I find it to be significantly worse than Sonnet 4.5. I've also had some problems that 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 Anthropic is making the right decisions with their models. Given that software engineering is probably one of the very few domains of AI…

I've had Gemini 3 Pro solve issues that Claude Code failed to solve after 10 tries. It even insulted some code that Sonnet 4.5 generated

I'm also finding Gemini 3 (via Gemini CLI) to be far superior to Claude in both quality and availability. I was hitting Claude limits every single day, at that point it's literally useless.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#132

Post by vanviegen »

Squarex wrote: post #17
827a wrote: post #12

I've played around with Gemini 3 Pro in Cursor, and honestly: I find it to be significantly worse than Sonnet 4.5. I've also had some problems that 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 Anthropic is making the right decisions with their models. Given that software engineering is probably one of the very few domains of AI…

I have heard that gemini 3 is not that great in cursor, but excellent in Antigravity. I don't have a time to personally verify all that though.

It's just not great at coding, period. In Antigravity it takes insane amounts of time and tokens for tasks that copilot/sonnet would solve in 30 seconds.

It generates tokens pretty rapidly, but most of them are useless social niceties it is uttering to itself in it's thinking process.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#134

Post by mceachen »

gregable wrote: post #71
chinathrow wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I gave Sonnet 4.5 a base64 encoded PHP serialize() json of an object dump and told him to extraxt the URL within. It gave me the Youtube-URL to Rick Astley.

it. Not him.

You can ask it. Each model responds slightly differently to "What pronouns do you prefer for yourself?"

Opus 4.5:

I don’t have strong preferences about pronouns for myself. People use “it,” “they,” or sometimes “he” or “she” when referring to me, and I’m comfortable with any of these.

If I had to express a slight preference, “it” or “they” feel most natural since I’m an AI rather than a person with a gender identity. But honestly, I’m happy with whatever feels most comfortable to you in conversation.

Haiku 4.5:

I don’t have a strong preference for pronouns since I’m an AI without a gender identity or personal identity the way humans have. People typically use “it” when referring to me, which is perfectly fine. Some people use “they” as well, and that works too.

Feel free to use whatever feels natural to you in our conversation. I’m not going to be bothered either way.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#135

Post by agentifysh »

jstummbillig wrote: post #124
agentifysh wrote: post #120

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?

codex-5.1-max I can see from benchmark is ~3% off what opus 4.5 is claiming and while i can see one off uses for it i can't see the 3x reduction in price being enticing enough to match what openai subsidizes

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#136

Post by mrtesthah »

jiggawatts wrote: post #111
egeozcan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm completely the opposite. I find Gemini (even 2.5 Pro) much, much better than anything else. But I hate agentic flows, I upload the full context to it in aistudio and then it shines - anything agentic cannot even come close.

I recently wrote a small CLI tool for scanning through legacy codebases. For each file, it does a light parse step to find every external identifier (function call, etc...), reads those into the context, and then asks questions about the main file in question. It's amazing for trawling through hundreds of thousands of lines of code looking for a complex pattern, a bug, bad style, or whatever that regex could never ho…

If this is a common task for you, I'd suggest instead using an LLM to translate your search query into CodeQL[1], which is designed to scan for semantic patterns in a codebase.

1. https://codeql.github.com/

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#137

Post by adriand »

bnchrch wrote: 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…

Don't throw away what's working for you just because some other company (temporarily) leapfrogs Anthropic a few percent on a benchmark. There's a lot to be said for what you're good at.

I also really want Anthropic to succeed because they are without question the most ethical of the frontier AI labs.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#138

Post by Capricorn2481 »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #46

This is gonna be game-changing for the next 2-4 weeks before they nerf the model. Then for the next 2-3 months people complaining about the degradation will be labeled “skill issue”. Then a sacrificial Anthropic engineer will “discover” a couple obscure bugs that “in some cases” might have lead to less than optimal performance. Still largely a user skill issue though. Then a couple months later they’ll release Opus 4…

Thank god people are noticing this. I'm pretty sick of companies putting a higher number next to models and programmers taking that at face value.

This reminds me of audio production debates about niche hardware emulations, like which company emulated the 1176 compressor the best. The differences between them all are so minute and insignificant, eventually people just insist they can "feel" the difference. Basically, whoever is placeboing the hardest.

Such is the case with LLMs. A tool that is already hard to measure because it gives different output with the same repeated input, and now people try to do A/B tests with models that are basically the same. The field has definitely made strides in how small models can be, but I've noticed very little improvement since gpt-4.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#139

Post by fragmede »

HugoDias wrote: post #76
mritchie712 wrote: post #55

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,…

it's not about the terminal, but about decoupling yourself from looking at the code. The Claude app lets you interact with a github repo from your phone.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#140

Post by pjm331 »

simonw wrote: post #100

Notes and two pelicans: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Nov/24/claude-opus/

i think you have an error there about haiku pricing

> For comparison, Sonnet 4.5 is $3/$15 and Haiku 4.5 is $4/$20.

i think haiku should be $1/$5

Post reply on HN