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

Claude Opus 4.7

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#131

Post by CodingJeebus »

msp26 wrote: post #85
benleejamin wrote: post #6

For 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.

They don't have the compute to make Mythos generally available: that's all there is to it. The exclusivity is also nice from a marketing pov.

I've read so many conflicting things about Mythos that it's become impossible to make any real assumptions about it. I don't think it's vaporware necessarily, but the whole "we can't release it for safety reasons" feels like the next level of "POC or STFU".

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#132

Post by egorfine »

Tiberium wrote: post #36
cupofjoakim wrote: post #20

> Opus 4.7 uses an updated tokenizer that improves how the model processes text. The tradeoff is that the same input can map to more tokens—roughly 1.0–1.35× depending on the content type. caveman[0] is becoming more relevant by the day. I already enjoy reading its output more than vanilla so suits me well. [0] https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman/tree/main

I hope people realize that tools like caveman are mostly joke/prank projects - almost the entirety of the context spent is in file reads (for input) and reasoning (in output), you will barely save even 1% with such a tool, and might actually confuse the model more or have it reason for more tokens because it'll have to formulate its respone in the way that satisfies the requirements.

They are indeed impractical in agentic coding.

However in deep research-like products you can have a pass with LLM to compress web page text into caveman speak, thus hugely compressing tokens.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#133

Post by hk__2 »

buildbot wrote: post #12

Too 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...

Meh. At $work we were on CC for one month, then switched to Codex for one month, and now will be on CC again to test. We haven’t seen any obvious difference between CC and Codex; both are sometimes very good and sometimes very stupid. You have to test for a long time, not just test one day and call it a benchmark just because you have a single example.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#134

Post by arcanemachiner »

desugun wrote: post #112
buildbot wrote: post #12

Too 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...

I guess our conscience of OpenAI working with the Department of War has an expiry date of 6 weeks.

That number is generous, and is also a pretty decent lifespan for a socially-conscious gesture in 2026.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#135

Post by naoru »

TIPSIO wrote: post #99
cupofjoakim wrote: post #20

> Opus 4.7 uses an updated tokenizer that improves how the model processes text. The tradeoff is that the same input can map to more tokens—roughly 1.0–1.35× depending on the content type. caveman[0] is becoming more relevant by the day. I already enjoy reading its output more than vanilla so suits me well. [0] https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman/tree/main

Oh wow, I love this idea even if it's relatively insignificant in savings. I am finding my writing prompt style is naturally getting lazier, shorter, and more caveman just like this too. If I was honest, it has made writing emails harder. While messing around, I did a concept of this with HTML to preserve tokens, worked surprisingly well but was only an experiment. Something like: > Hello AI compressed to: > h1 c bgr…

You'd like Emmet notation. Just look at the cheat sheet: https://docs.emmet.io/cheat-sheet/

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#136

Post by grandinquistor »

verdverm wrote: post #115
grandinquistor wrote: post #94

Quite a big improvement in coding benchmarks, doesn’t seem like progress is plateauing as some people predicted.

Some of the benchmarks went down, has that happened before?

Probably deprioritizing other areas to focus on swe capabilities since I reckon most of their revenue is from enterprise coding usage.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#137

Post by theptip »

jameson wrote: post #97

How should one compare benchmark results? For example, SWE-bench Pro improved ~11% compared with Opus 4.6. Should one interpret it as 4.7 is able to solve more difficult problems? or 11% less hallucinations?

11% further along the particular bell curve of SWE-bench. Not really easy to extrapolate to real world, especially given that eg the Chinese models tend to heavily train on the benchmarks. But a 10% bump with the same model should equate to “feels noticeably smarter”.

A more quantifiable eval would be METR’s task time - it’s the duration of tasks that the model can complete on average 50% of the time, we’ll have to wait to see where 4.7 lands on this one.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#138

Post by anonfunction »

mesmertech wrote: post #48

Not 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 found
Just love that I'm paying $200 for models features they announce I can't use!

Related features that were announced I have yet to be able to use:

    $ claude --enable-auto-mode 
    auto mode is unavailable for your plan

    $ claude
    /memory 
    Auto-dream: on · /dream to run
    Unknown skill: dream

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#139

Post by hgoel »

Interesting to see the benchmark numbers, though at this point I find these incremental seeming updates hard to interpret into capability increases for me beyond just "it might be somewhat better".

Maybe I've skimmed too quickly and missed it, but does calling it 4.7 instead of 5 imply that it's the same as 4.6, just trained with further refined data/fine tuned to adapt the 4.6 weights to the new tokenizer etc?

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#140

Post by Leynos »

TIPSIO wrote: post #99
cupofjoakim wrote: post #20

> Opus 4.7 uses an updated tokenizer that improves how the model processes text. The tradeoff is that the same input can map to more tokens—roughly 1.0–1.35× depending on the content type. caveman[0] is becoming more relevant by the day. I already enjoy reading its output more than vanilla so suits me well. [0] https://github.com/JuliusBrussee/caveman/tree/main

Oh wow, I love this idea even if it's relatively insignificant in savings. I am finding my writing prompt style is naturally getting lazier, shorter, and more caveman just like this too. If I was honest, it has made writing emails harder. While messing around, I did a concept of this with HTML to preserve tokens, worked surprisingly well but was only an experiment. Something like: > Hello AI compressed to: > h1 c bgr…

Combine that with emmet / zen coding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmet_%28software%29?wprov=sfl...
Post reply on HN