Live data from Hacker News

Claude Sonnet 5

anthropic.com

231–240 of 822 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered getting better at coding so you can build stuff yourself instead of waiting for models you might not be able to get access to anymore?

This is like telling someone who wants a motorcycle that they should get better at running instead.

When the motorcycle manufacturers keep making each new model worse and more expensive and the government keeps trying to ban them.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#232
post #225
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 tr…

Never said otherwise, but it changes nothing. Their beliefs got them to this point on the timeline and that in itself cannot be ignored (or should I say, it should inform our priors...?) You can like or dislike them or what they do or don't do, but you must respect them regardless of that, purely because of their track record.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#233
post #22

Anthropic's run on the model and product side of things is highly impressive. They got Sam A. punching the air consistently, which is well-deserved and self-inflicted above all.

Wdym? They've been knocking it out of the park on marketing, but Claude Code is still a meme, and Opus is getting trashed by GPT5.5 meanwhile you can't even use their "dominant" model, and anecdotal reports from when people could use Fable, when they weren't getting silently poisoned, was that it was only marginally better than GPT 5.5 in terms of SWE smarts, mostly being better in terms of pleasantness to interact w…

> Claude Code is still a meme

Claude Code generates more revenue than OpenAI...It appears to be a nice meme.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s a massive improvement over the previous model, and cheaper? You are reading too much into the graph and ignoring the threshold of usefulness for real world tasks. By that logic Sonnet 4.5 would have never been worth using.

Am i missing something? Because your making my point. Its only worth it compared to Opus 4.8, if the tasks your running requires Opus 4.8 low (or non-existing lower). For the rest the gap in pricing vs efficiency is so small, that there is no point in using Sonnet. I am looking at their own cost comparisons vs efficiency...

The point is that Sonnet at medium or even low will be smart enough for most daily tasks. You’re defining “worth using” as if you always need the highest performance possible, which is what these benchmarks measure, but most work doesn’t need it. You’ll pay more to get the same result. Sonnet 4.5 is very popular as a main model currently, this is a free upgrade.

I use Haiku a lot for agent workflows, if I can get better output at similar prices, Sonnet 5 will replace it completely.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#235

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.

Speed is a huge reason. Sometimes you just need some simple tasks get done fast, and waiting 30-60 seconds for opus to even start thinking can really slow things down.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wdym? They've been knocking it out of the park on marketing, but Claude Code is still a meme, and Opus is getting trashed by GPT5.5 meanwhile you can't even use their "dominant" model, and anecdotal reports from when people could use Fable, when they weren't getting silently poisoned, was that it was only marginally better than GPT 5.5 in terms of SWE smarts, mostly being better in terms of pleasantness to interact w…

> Claude Code is still a meme Claude Code generates more revenue than OpenAI...It appears to be a nice meme.

Like I said, Anthropic's marketing is killing it, they've got people freely(?) shilling for them on public forums so even if they have shit developer relations and community relations and a model that's mostly worse while being more expensive, they can ride a wave of misinformation.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#237
So many things to think about regarding these "benchmarks":

- Do the ever increasing scores on the mean we will soon have models that approach 100%? And what would that even mean? That there is no more room for improvement?

- Would Anthropic (or any other model vendor for that matter) ever release a newer model that scores lower? If not, does that mean they keep tweaking a new model they want to release until it shows an improvement of the prior model?

- Would it be more useful to move toward a comparative rather than absolute ranking?

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#238
Important to note that the cost graphs are heavily distorted. The agentic serch one for example is divided into 3 'columns': $0-$2, $2-$5 and $5-$10.

And yet, the $2-$5 section is the widest, even though it only contains a single point.

I can't even say if this is making the product look better or not, but it sure is weird. Maybe Claude just hallucinated those splits xD

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Whether they believe it or not is immaterial. It is the end-goal they want to achieve, because then they own the means of production entirely.

I find these nefarious intention theories shallow. It can both be the case that the endstate is them owning the means of production without that being the intended guiding goal. Companies can chase profit without being Leninistic boogeymen.

Re: Claude Sonnet 5

#240
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why Fable was so good. It followed instructions and it was in no way lazy.

People keep making comments about fable like this? You could only use it for what like a week? How is that at all enough time to evaluate? Opus 4.6 didnt suffer from this problems for a hot minute and then when newer models were released it got worse. I think they change a ton behind the scenes and allocate compute however they want, so the model you use today may behave much differently than how it behaved yesterday

The ~72 hours I had access to Fable were by far the most productive I've had in months. Re-wrote massive parts of my codebase and caught a ton of bugs and logic issues that had silently slipped through before. I went over my subscription limit and immediately kept paying the API price to keep going. It was that good.
Post reply on HN