Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
tokens.billchambers.me
Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
1–10 of 620 posts
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#2I wanted to better understand the potential impact for the tokenizer change from 4.6 and 4.7.
I'm surprised that it's 45%. Might go down (?) with longer context answers but still surprising. It can be more than 2x for small prompts.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#3Should the title here be 4.6 to 4.7 instead of the other way around?
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#4Should the title here be 4.6 to 4.7 instead of the other way around?
absolutely!
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#5Should the title here be 4.6 to 4.7 instead of the other way around?
Writing Opus 4.6 to 4.7 does make more sense for people who read left to right.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#6Wow this is pretty spectacular. And with the losses anthro and OAI are running, don’t expect this trend to change. You will get incremental output improvements for a dramatically more expensive subscription plan.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#7Wow this is pretty spectacular. And with the losses anthro and OAI are running, don’t expect this trend to change. You will get incremental output improvements for a dramatically more expensive subscription plan.
[deleted]
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#8i think it is quite clear that staying with opus 4.6 is the way to go, on top of the inflation, 4.7 is quite... dumb. i think they have lobotomized this model while they were prioritizing cybersecurity and blocking people from performing potentially harmful security related tasks.
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#9I wanted to better understand the potential impact for the tokenizer change from 4.6 and 4.7. I'm surprised that it's 45%. Might go down (?) with longer context answers but still surprising. It can be more than 2x for small prompts.
Not very encouraging for longer use, especially that the longer the conversation, the higher the chance the agent will go off the rails
Re: Anonymous request-token comparisons from Opus 4.6 and Opus 4.7
#10This, the push towards per-token API charging, and the rest are just a sign of things to come when they finally establish a moat and full monoply/duopoly, which is also what all the specialized tools like Designer and integrations are about.
It's going to be a very expensive game, and the masses will be left with subpar local versions. It would be like if we reversed the democratization of compilers and coding tooling, done in the 90s and 00s, and the polished more capable tools are again all proprietary.