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

Claude Opus 4.1

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 344 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#161

Post by paul7986 »

Claude plus failed me today badly compared to chatGPT plus.

I uploaded a web design of mine (jpeg) and asked Claude to create the html/css. Asked GPT to do the same. GPT's code looked the closet to the design I created and uploaded. Just five to ten small tweaks and I was done vs. Claude it would have taken me almost triple the steps.

I actually subscribed to both today (resubscribed to GPT) and going to keep testing which one is the better front-end developer (i am, but got to embrace AI ).

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#162

Post by squeaky-clean »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #95
AlecSchueler wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what's complicated about what you're describing? They offer two models and you can pay more for higher usage limits, then you can choose if you want to run it in your browser or in your terminal. Like what else would you expect? Fwiw I have a Claude pro plan and have no interest in using other offerings so I'm not sure if they're super simple (one model, one interface, one pricing plan)?

When people post this stuff, it's like, are you also confused that Nike sells shoes AND shorts AND shirts, and there's different colors and skus for each article of clothing, and sometimes they sell direct to consumer and other times to stores and to universities, and also there's sales and promotions, etc, etc? It's almost as if companies sell more than one product. Why is this the top comment on so many threads abo…

Which Nike shoe is best for basketball? The Nike Dunk, Air Force 1, Air Jordan, LeBron 20, LeBron XXI Prime 93, Kobe IX elite, Giannis Freak 7, GT Cut, GT Cut 3, GT Cut 3 Turbo, GT Hustle 3, or the KD18?

At least with those you can buy whatever you think is coolest. Which Claude model and interface should the average programmer use?

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#163

Post by dsrtslnd23 »

biinjo wrote: post #35
jzig wrote: post #10

I'm confused by how Opus is presented to be superior in nearly every way for coding purposes yet the general consensus and my own experience seem to be that Sonnet is much much better. Has anyone switched to entirely using Opus from Sonnet? Or maybe switching to Opus for certain things while using Sonnet for others?

Im on the Max plan and generally Opus seems to do better work than Sonnet. However, that’s only when they allow me to use Opus. The usage limits, even on the max plan, are a joke. Yesterday I hit the limits within MINUTES of starting my work day.

same here constantly hit the Opus limits after minutes on Max plan

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#166

Post by slackpad »

potatolicious wrote: post #151
ryandrake wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's Claude, Claude, and Claude. Which ones code for you? Thanks for articulating the confusion better than I could! I feel it's a similar branding problem as other tech companies have: I'm watching Apple TV+ on my Apple TV software running on my Apple TV connected to my Google TV that isn't actually manufactured by Google. But that Google TV also has an Apple TV app that can play Apple TV+.

It's a bit worse than a branding problem honestly, since there's legitimate overlap between products, because ultimately they're different expressions of the same underlying LLMs. I'm not sure if you ever got a good rundown, but the tl;dr is that the 3 products ("Desktop", Code, and API) all expose the same underlying models, but are given different prompts, tools, and context management techniques that make them beh…

Claude Code running in a terminal can connect to your IDE so you can review its proposed changes there. I’ve found this to be a nice drop in way to try it out without having to change your core workflow and tools too much. Check out the /ide command for details.

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#167

Post by keeeba »

gpm wrote: post #39
adastra22 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time that Sonnet is acting like it has brain damage (which is once or twice a day), I switch to Opus and it seems to sort things out pretty fast. This is unscientific anicdata though, and it could just be that switching models (any model) would have worked.

This seems like a case of reversion to the mean. When one model is performing below average, changing anything (like switching to another model) is likely to improve it by random chance...

Anthropic say Opus is better, benchmarks & evals say Opus is better, Opus has more parameters and parameters determine how much a NN can learn.

Maybe Opus just is better

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#168

Post by Topfi »

haaz wrote: post #9

it is barely an improvement according to their own benchmarks. not saying thats a bad thing, but not enough for anybody to notice any difference

I am still very early, but output quality wise, yes, there does not seem to be any noticeable improvement in my limited personal testing suite. What I have noticed though is subjectively better adherence to instructions and documentation provided outside the main prompt, though I have no way to quantify or reliably test that yet. So beyond reliably finding Needles-in-the-Haystack (which Frontier models have done well on lately), Opus 4.1 seems to do better in following those needles even if not explicitly guided to compared to Opus 4.

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#169

Post by jimbo808 »

ryandrake wrote: post #60

Am I the only one super confused about how to even get started trying out this stuff? Just so I wouldn't be "that critic who doesn't try the stuff he criticizes," I tried GitHub Copilot and was kind of not very impressed. Someone on HN told me Copilot sucks, use Claude. But I have no idea what the right way to do it is because there are so many paths to choose. Let's see: we have Claude Code vs. Claude the API vs. Cl…

You just described all of your options in detail - what's the problem? Pick one. Seems like you've got a very thorough grasp on how to get started trying the stuff out, but it requires you to choose how you want to do that.

Re: Claude Opus 4.1

#170

Post by [deleted] »

keeeba wrote: post #167
gpm wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a case of reversion to the mean. When one model is performing below average, changing anything (like switching to another model) is likely to improve it by random chance...

Anthropic say Opus is better, benchmarks & evals say Opus is better, Opus has more parameters and parameters determine how much a NN can learn. Maybe Opus just is better

[deleted]
Post reply on HN