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

$500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 311 posts

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#111

Post by graemep »

hollerith wrote: post #72
nyargh wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bold of you to assume competency will overpower politics in our current era.

So far, the country I know best, the US, has been competent enough to avoid massive corporate bailouts except the aforementioned banks in 2008 and GM. The bailout of GM was not motivated by a desire to avoid a recession when a bubble pops. If the AI labs become very influential and powerful, Washington might nationalize them, but that would be very different from bailing them out because they have become unprofitable…

Do the examples of the banks and GM suggest that it is likely that AI companies will get a bailout to avoid the bubble popping?

The reason the banks bailouts did not involve nationalisation is that the US is very reluctant to nationalise anything.

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#112

Post by lukan »

hollerith wrote: post #60
bluefirebrand wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope so too, but I think it's wishful thinking. Be prepared for the mother of all financial bailouts from the world governments to make sure that doesn't happen

I can understand why banks got bailed out by the US gov in 2008, but why would a government feel the need to bail out AI labs? I hope you are not going to say, "to avoid a global recession or depression caused by the popping of the AI bubble". That would be unnecessary and harmful (in its second-order effects), and governments do have advisors who are competent enough in economics to advise against such a move.

"but why would a government feel the need to bail out AI labs"

Oh easy, with all the drones and sensors, AI means military power. Those who dare opposing the bailout of the local AI gigants want the other side to win.

/s

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#113

Post by aleph_minus_one »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #70
rf15 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot afford the SOTA.

Why is that? The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage. Opus 4.6 is available on the $20 plan too

> The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage.

200 USD/month is a number only really affluent programmers (e.g. in the Silicon Valley) can perhaps pay easily.

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#114

Post by tim-projects »

miroljub wrote: post #109
mmaunder wrote: post #17

I’d encourage devs to use MiniMax, Kimi, etc for real world tasks that require intelligence. The down sides emerge pretty fast: much higher reasoning token use, slower outputs, and degradation that is palpable. Sadly, you do get what you pay for right now. However that doesn’t prevent you from saving tons through smart model routing, being smart about reasoning budgets, and using max output tokens wisely. And optimiz…

> I’d encourage devs to use MiniMax, Kimi, etc for real world tasks that require intelligence. I use MiniMax daily, mostly for coding tasks, using pi-coding-agent mostly. > The down sides emerge pretty fast: much higher reasoning token use, slower outputs, and degradation that is palpable. I don't care about token use, I pay per request in my cheap coding plan. I didn't notice slower outputs, it's even faster than An…

I've only been using free tokens for a year now. Gemini and they just dropped pro so I switched to minimax. Bit of a hurdle switching from Gemini-cli to kilo-cli, but now I can't really see too much difference.

If I was starting new projects I'd pay for a better model, but honestly I don't really know any different.

I've not ever used Claude and people seem to rave about it. Maybe its good, but I doubt its $200/month good.

When I hit issues with these lower models I think hard about creating the right tooling - agnostic to the harness and I feel like maybe its more work but I can carry those tools to any setup going forward. That's how it was in the early Linux days so why change what clearly works?

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#115

Post by weird-eye-issue »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #113
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that? The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage. Opus 4.6 is available on the $20 plan too

> The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage. 200 USD/month is a number only really affluent programmers (e.g. in the Silicon Valley) can perhaps pay easily.

"Opus 4.6 is available on the $20 plan too"

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#116

Post by esskay »

hhh wrote: post #104
withinboredom wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opus 4.5 ~= Opus 4.6 high. Opus 4.5 was nerfed just before or after the release of 4.6.

The models don’t change.

Real world usage suggests otherwise. It's been a known trend for a while. Anthropic even confirmed as such ~6 months ago but said it was a "bug" - one that somehow just keeps happening 4-6 months after a model is released.

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#117

Post by Epholys »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #70
rf15 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot afford the SOTA.

Why is that? The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage. Opus 4.6 is available on the $20 plan too

> The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage.

$200 dollars + VAT is half of my rent.

I know HN is not a good place to rant on this subject, but I'm often flabbergasted about the number of people here that lives in a bubble with regard to the price of tech. Or just prices in general.

I remember someone who said a few years ago (I'm paraphrasing): "You could just use one of the empty room in your house!". It was so outlandish I believed it was a joke at first.

EDIT: "not", minor grammar

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#118

Post by revolvingthrow »

weird-eye-issue wrote: post #115
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The $200 per month subscription comes with a ton of usage. 200 USD/month is a number only really affluent programmers (e.g. in the Silicon Valley) can perhaps pay easily.

"Opus 4.6 is available on the $20 plan too"

Anthropic’s $20 plan gives you such a pittance of tokens that it’s borderline unusable for anything more than a few scripts or a toy app. If $20 is all you have you’d do _much_ better going with chatgpt

Re: $500 GPU outperforms Claude Sonnet on coding benchmarks

#120

Post by BoredomIsFun »

simonw wrote: post #14
mikestorrent wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cheaper than the cost of local electricity only. Can you explain what that means?

I think they mean that the DeepSeek API charges are less than it would cost for the electricity to run a local model. Local model enthusiasts often assume that running locally is more energy efficient than running in a data center, but fail to take the economies of scale into account.

> Local model enthusiasts often assume that running locally is more energy efficient than running in a data center,

It is a well known 101 truism in /r/Localllama that local is rarely cheaper, unless run batched - then it is massively, 10x cheaper indeed.

> I think they mean that the DeepSeek API charges are less than it would cost for the electricity to run a local model.

Because it is hosted in China, where energy is cheap. In ex-USSR where I live it is inexpensive too, and keeping in mind that whole winter I had to use small space heater, due to inadequacy of my central heating, using local came out as 100% free.

Post reply on HN