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

Claude Sonnet 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 822 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#221

Post by mattas »

m3h wrote: post #202

Important to note: "Sonnet 5 is an upgrade to Sonnet 4.6, but it uses an updated tokenizer that changes how the model processes text to improve performance (this is similar to the tokenizer change we introduced with Claude Opus 4.7). The tradeoff is that the same input can map to more tokens: roughly 1.0–1.35× depending on the content type. The introductory pricing is set so that the transition to Sonnet 5 is roughly…

"We can raise prices in two ways: (1) raise the price per token and (2) increase the number of tokens we generate on your behalf. We promise not to do (2) maliciously. Promise."

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#222

Post by mwigdahl »

user43928 wrote: post #197
mwigdahl wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to sound like an LLM, but that seems exactly right to me. Use it as a cheaper, high-functioning task subagent and lower reasoning for a master Opus session. As long as not every portion of your task requires maximum intelligence, you should come out ahead.

Won't any input be charged uncached, and the output of the small model charged again as uncached input to the bigger model? I don't know whether that comes out ahead compared to just staying with the better model in the first place.

It's a good question, but for multiturn conversations even cached context adds up quickly. My experience has been that spawning off subagents for defined tasks in a large overall plan generally makes me come out ahead.

I'm sure folks' mileage will vary though.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#223

Post by nicce »

doctoboggan wrote: post #29

The cost per task chart is telling me that I should _never_ use Sonnet 5 above medium effort level - Opus always performs better for a given cost. So I guess the takeaway is that if Sonnet 5 medium isn't good enough for you, switch models, not effort levels.

> Opus always performs better for a given cost.

Assume it to get deprecated sooner rather than later.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#224

Post by whstl »

epolanski wrote: post #120
microtonal wrote: post #31

Claude Sonnet 5 is built to be the most agentic Sonnet model yet. It can make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models. I have been using Sonnet 4.6 more than Opus, because I'm mostly doing agent-assisted development and not fully agent-driven development. This announcement does not make me positive, I have fou…

I've been saying for ages that since Opus 4.6 models are increasingly smarter but further unhelpful as assistants. Fable was amazing as a vibecoder but as an assistant it can't resist jumping into implementation and filling chats of pointless jargon. It's really grim if you're looking for assistance instead of an implementor. GPT 5.5 Pro and Fable are gorgeous bullshitters that pretend to be right (often convincingly…

Yep, this is why experiences and ratings of models vary so wildly.

I recently migrated a very large web app to Tailwind and Opus kept screwing up over and over, refactoring and changing the design, the more complex the component became.

I ended up asking Haiku to do it and it managed to do everything correctly, pretty much without intervention.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#225

Post by tancop »

baq wrote: post #147
cute_boi wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they don’t understand that cybersecurity skills are what prevent bad code from making it into production. It’s like telling a chef to cook without a knife because knives can kill people. Dario and his lackeys at Anthropic aren’t visionaries.

I think you misunderstood what their vision is, or rather what their possible futures are. They are many steps ahead of almost everyone, both in wargaming possibilities and the actual realized path. What doesn’t make sense to you may be the only safe option for them.

> What doesn’t make sense to you may be the only safe option for them

thats true because their point of view makes no sense for us. dario is all in on lesswrong machine god theory and really believes they need to create a super intelligence before anyone else. that means doing as much as possible to slow down others progress and accelerate your own. but the fact that they believe its the only option doesnt make it true for the rest of us.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#226

Post by a_c »

microtonal wrote: post #31

Claude Sonnet 5 is built to be the most agentic Sonnet model yet. It can make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models. I have been using Sonnet 4.6 more than Opus, because I'm mostly doing agent-assisted development and not fully agent-driven development. This announcement does not make me positive, I have fou…

I actually use sonnet 4.6 for my day to day coding too. It consumes much less token and good enough. Opus is just too token consuming for it to be useful to me.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#227

Post by nicce »

Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #216

I'm struggling to understand why I'd ever use this instead of just using a lower effort level for opus given on many of the benchmarks listed the cost per task rises above opus at anything higher than medium effort. Only thing I can think of is for when someone is out of opus credits. Of course there are API billing use cases but I'd probably still just use opus on low.

Older Opus models will likely get deprecated and then over time this is the cheapest model. That is how prices are currently increased.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#228

Post by pkulak »

Brendinooo wrote: post #129
microtonal wrote: post #31

Claude Sonnet 5 is built to be the most agentic Sonnet model yet. It can make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models. I have been using Sonnet 4.6 more than Opus, because I'm mostly doing agent-assisted development and not fully agent-driven development. This announcement does not make me positive, I have fou…

Yeah, there's a real opportunity for one of these companies to invest time in a model that's tuned for, to use your term, agent-assisted developement. Trouble is, everyone inside their buildings seems to believe that no one will be working like that in a year or two.

And every benchmark is "build GTA-6 from nothing, as a single-page web app".

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#229

Post by bazhand »

a_c wrote: post #226
microtonal wrote: post #31

Claude Sonnet 5 is built to be the most agentic Sonnet model yet. It can make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models. I have been using Sonnet 4.6 more than Opus, because I'm mostly doing agent-assisted development and not fully agent-driven development. This announcement does not make me positive, I have fou…

I actually use sonnet 4.6 for my day to day coding too. It consumes much less token and good enough. Opus is just too token consuming for it to be useful to me.

Have you tried '/model opusplan' I've had strong results mixing opus for planning with sonnet implementing.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#230

Post by 081c28a92 »

baq wrote: post #157
satvikpendem wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Due to Dario hyping it up as a world ending model. If they kept their mouths shut we'd all have it now still.

Where is gpt 5.6?

Victim of the same hype generated by Dario. Now everyone has to walk on eggshells, do limited releases to trusted partners, and nerf their cybersecurity capabilities lest they get deemed “too powerful to release”.
Post reply on HN