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

Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 458 posts

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#131

Post by gruez »

manquer wrote: post #102
Aurornis wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their valuations differ by about 13%. That's close enough that I wouldn't call it "blown past". Things change fast in this space. Anthropic had a big boost from having the premier coding model for a while, but GPT-5.5 has closed that gap at a time when a lot of Anthropic customers are looking for cheaper alternatives. Anthropic is coming off of a recent change to their enterprise billing that substantially changed th…

> but GPT-5.5 has closed that gap at a time when a lot of Anthropic customers are looking for cheaper alternatives. GPT-5.5 is a bit more expensive than Opus ? Current list prices | Model | Input | Output | | GPT-5.5 | $5/MTok | $30/MTok | | Opus 4.8/7 | $5/MTok | $25/MTok | Deepseek perhaps would be the top threat on a pure price/performance metric for either of them. It doesn't look like OAI is going for the value…

Comparing $/MTokfor models makes as much sense as comparing $/ghz for CPUs. Models have different tokenizers and take varying number of "thinking" to get to a solution. A far better proxy is how much it takes to do a run, which takes all of that into account. Such metrics are much harder to gather, but once source claims $3357 for gpt-5.5 vs $4686 for opus, the opposite of your conclusion.

https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=intelligence-vs-cost

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#132

Post by decimalenough »

icedchai wrote: post #121
claytongulick wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just finished talking to a dev manager friend of mine at a household name company. He told me they are massively pulling back on the AI stuff. Right now the lashback is about cost, because that's the most easily measured pain point. Soon, we'll start seeing a deeper understanding of the quality issues. At that point, it's likely this whole experiment gets firmly put in a bin of the toolbox where it belongs.

I know people at medium size companies where they are tracking AI costs very carefully. They are pulling back to levels under $100/week in AI spend per engineer, encouraging use of lower quality, lower cost models, etc.

I don't doubt you, but $100 is approximately the cost to company of one hour of dev time. If companies end up being willing to spend only 2% of their dev budget on AI, this bubble is not going to last long.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#133

Post by llm_nerd »

alecco wrote: post #52
cmiles8 wrote: post #12

Probably the bigger headline here is that they’ve blown past OpenAI in revenue and valuation, with OpenAI looking increasingly shaky and vulnerable.

Anthropic is at the mercy of 3rd party datacenter contracts. AFAIK OpenAI will soon run mostly on on their own GPUs. I don't like Altman and I am still upset about his memory deal last year but he prepared for the current shortages months before anybody else. Meanwhile, Anthropic seems to lack any plans besides third party contracting. IMHO they got very lucky with xAI and Google having spare capacity and willing to…

>Anthropic is at the mercy of 3rd party datacenter contracts

I mean, this is a bit like complaining that McDonalds doesn't have their own herds of cows. OpenAI actually isn't in the business of buying GPUs or running data centres, and it's pretty weird to think that's an advantage (though it comes up constantly on here, as Anthropic keeps eating OpenAI's lunch).

There are many suppliers that are desperate to fight for Anthropics business, and it has shown an agility to embrace whatever advances in the industry come along. Anthropic is now running across a million or so Google TPUv8s, for instance. If tomorrow someone else comes out with a better GPU/TPU, they can embrace it in a heartbeat.

All while OpenAI sits on their rapidly depreciating GPUs.

Or...actually they won't, because OpenAI doesn't take business advice from HN. The vast majority of OpenAI's compute is from Microsoft, Oracle and so on. They're smart enough to not become a big hardware purchaser when that isn't their business. The core claim of your comment simply isn't true at all, nor is that the direction OpenAI is moving.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#134

Post by tomwheeler »

Npovview wrote: post #125
toasty228 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once they reach series Z does it go back to A or do we get a new format like AA, AB ?

We live in Unicode times. We switch to Greek alphabets. α β γ δ ε ζ η θ ι κ λ μ ν ξ ο π ρ σ τ υ φ χ ψ ω

After those are used up, it moves to Devanagari, Hangul, Katakana, Hiragana, and then Kanji.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#135

Post by dyauspitr »

cmiles8 wrote: post #12

Probably the bigger headline here is that they’ve blown past OpenAI in revenue and valuation, with OpenAI looking increasingly shaky and vulnerable.

Having used Codex though I don’t think OpenAI needs to worry. It’s a solid product and they will share the market.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#136

Post by andrewl-hn »

tredre3 wrote: post #114
jmathai wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Even Anthropic is such better branding than OpenAI (especially considering they're not open at all). My wife knows about Claude because that's what I use and we pay for. She uses it also as a result. And inevitably she will talk about Claude to her friends.

> The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Absolutely not, you live in a bubble. Everybody knows about ChatGPT. Few non-programmers have heard of anthropic or claude, nor do they care. But they all know what ChatGPT is.

ChatGPT is a word now. People may use Perplexity, or Google, or Grok to ask questions online. And later they tell you "ChatGPT told me this". It's a new "I googled in Yahoo".

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#137

Post by halamadrid »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #65
topherPedersen wrote: post #62

Anthropic has a great product, but what's going on in the stock market is astonishing. Companies waiting to be valued at a trillion dollars before going public? (I'm writing this comment with the assumption that they will go public soon and the valuation will be higher than this $965 billion dollar private valuation) The stock market used to be a place for companies to raise money from investors. But that isn't what…

> But that isn't what it is anymore, it's a dumping ground. We got "dumped" Google and Facebook, so... Those probably made up for all the other "dumps". We also got "dumped" TSLA, which is meme-ing in the trillions at the moment. You can short Anthropic at IPO if you want...

Looking back it feels like GOOG, FB, TSLA etc. all went IPO at reasonable valuations. Retail & public investors did benefit long term and continuing to get higher valuations in public is not a small feat compared to a VC valuation.

A trillion dollar valuation seemed so hard back in the day and now there are so many companies in that list. What's the next level?

Is this just signs that $ is no longer the inflating at the same rate over time and its the realistic inflation that is reflecting in the stock market?

Prices of all goods surely has to follow to make up for the revenue needed to sustain these valuations and also the salaries to sustain the prices.

Unfortunately, those who are not in the loop is not going to have a good time.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#138

Post by vasco »

tredre3 wrote: post #114
jmathai wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Even Anthropic is such better branding than OpenAI (especially considering they're not open at all). My wife knows about Claude because that's what I use and we pay for. She uses it also as a result. And inevitably she will talk about Claude to her friends.

> The branding of Claude is so much stronger than ChatGPT. Absolutely not, you live in a bubble. Everybody knows about ChatGPT. Few non-programmers have heard of anthropic or claude, nor do they care. But they all know what ChatGPT is.

Everyone knew Altavista too

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#139

Post by manquer »

Spartan-S63 wrote: post #129
manquer wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but GPT-5.5 has closed that gap at a time when a lot of Anthropic customers are looking for cheaper alternatives. GPT-5.5 is a bit more expensive than Opus ? Current list prices | Model | Input | Output | | GPT-5.5 | $5/MTok | $30/MTok | | Opus 4.8/7 | $5/MTok | $25/MTok | Deepseek perhaps would be the top threat on a pure price/performance metric for either of them. It doesn't look like OAI is going for the value…

Most variants of GPT-5.5 are less chatty and token-intensive than Opus 4.8/4.7, so despite the output token price being higher, it generates fewer tokens, so the net cost is lower. Per-token pricing is totally sensible from the provider-perspective on mapping COGS to revenue, but for a consumer, different models will produce more or less tokens, meaning the cost calculation is multi-dimensional.

You can configure model to be terse/concise with output style ? There are plenty of popular projects like https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman which do it for you even.

Input/Cache/Output ratios are use case and configuration dependent . Any benefits in one model can usually be roughly to another with configuration tuning, and discussions devolve into subjective experience.

Pricing sheet is the objective way to compare cost.

Re: Anthropic raises $65B in Series H funding at $965B post-money valuation

#140

Post by vidarh »

icedchai wrote: post #121
claytongulick wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just finished talking to a dev manager friend of mine at a household name company. He told me they are massively pulling back on the AI stuff. Right now the lashback is about cost, because that's the most easily measured pain point. Soon, we'll start seeing a deeper understanding of the quality issues. At that point, it's likely this whole experiment gets firmly put in a bin of the toolbox where it belongs.

I know people at medium size companies where they are tracking AI costs very carefully. They are pulling back to levels under $100/week in AI spend per engineer, encouraging use of lower quality, lower cost models, etc.

You can run models near 24/7 per developers at that price with judicious choice of subscriptions, so that's not really saying much.

Most people don't yet have mature enough setups to fully exploit that level of use.

Post reply on HN