Claude Opus 4.7
81–90 of 1001 posts
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#82Not showing up in claude code by default on the latest version. Apparently this is how to set it: /model claude-opus-4-7 Coming from anthropic's support page, so hopefully they did't hallucinate the docs, cause the model name on claude code says: /model claude-opus-4-7 ⎿ Set model to Opus 4 what model are you? I'm Claude Opus 4 (model ID: claude-opus-4-7).
> /model claude-opus-4.7
⎿ Model 'claude-opus-4.7' not foundRe: Claude Opus 4.7
#83Have they effectively communicated what a 20x or 10x Claude subscription actually means? And with Claude 4.7 increasing usage by 1.35x does that mean a 20x plan is now really a 13x plan (no token increase on the subscription) or a 27x plan (more tokens given to compensate for more computer cost) relative to Claude Opus 4.6?
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#84Too late, personally after how bad 4.6 was the past week I was pushed to codex, which seems to mostly work at the same level from day to day. Just last night I was trying to get 4.6 to lookup how to do some simple tensor parallel work, and the agent used 0 web fetches and just hallucinated 17K very wrong tokens. Then the main agent decided to pretend to implement tp, and just copied the entire model to each node...
Until the next time they push you back to Claude. At this point, I feel like this has to be the most unstable technology ever released. Imagine if docker had stopped working every two releases
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#85For anyone who was wondering about Mythos release plans: > What we learn from the real-world deployment of these safeguards will help us work towards our eventual goal of a broad release of Mythos-class models.
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#86Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#87I just subscribed this month again because I wanted to have some fun with my projects. Tried out opus 4.6 a bit and it is really really bad. Why do people say it's so good? It cannot come up with any half-decent vhdl. No matter the prompt. I'm very disappointed. I was told it's a good model
Because it was good until January 2026, then it detoriated into a opus-3.1. Probably given much less context windows or ram.
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#88I just subscribed this month again because I wanted to have some fun with my projects. Tried out opus 4.6 a bit and it is really really bad. Why do people say it's so good? It cannot come up with any half-decent vhdl. No matter the prompt. I'm very disappointed. I was told it's a good model
And yet another "AI doesn't work" comment without any meaningful information. What were your exact prompts? What was the output? This is like a user of conventional software complaining that "it crashes", without a single bit of detail, like what they did before the crash, if there was any error message, whether the program froze or completely disappeared, etc.
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#89> We are releasing Opus 4.7 with safeguards that automatically detect and block requests that indicate prohibited or high-risk cybersecurity uses. Fucking hell. Opus was my go-to for reverse engineering and cybersecurity uses, because, unlike OpenAI's ChatGPT, Anthropic's Opus didn't care about being asked to RE things or poke at vulns. It would, however, shit a brick and block requests every time something remotely…
Re: Claude Opus 4.7
#90I'm not sure how much I trust Anthropic recently. This coming right after a noticeable downgrade just makes me think Opus 4.7 is going to be the same Opus i was experiencing a few months ago rather than actual performance boost. Anthropic need to build back some trust and communicate throtelling/reasoning caps more clearly.
They don't have enough compute for all their customers. OpenAI bet on more compute early on which prompted people to say they're going to go bankrupt and collapse. But now it seems like it's a major strategic advantage. They're 2x'ing usage limits on Codex plans to steal CC customers and it seems to be working. It seems like 90% of Claude's recent problems are strictly lack of compute related.