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

211–220 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#211

Post by u_sama »

fetus8 wrote: post #182
u_sama wrote: post #5

Excited to use 1 prompt and have my whole 5-hour window at 100%. They can keep releasing new ones but if they don't solve their whole token shrinkage and gaslighting it is not gonna be interesting to se.

on Tuesday, with 4.6, I waited for my 5 hour window to reset, asked it to resume, and it burned up all my tokens for the next 5 hour window and ran for less than 10 seconds. I’ve never cancelled a subscription so fast.

I tried the Claude Extension for VSCode on WSL for a reverse engineering task, it consumed all of my tokens, broke and didn't even save the conversatioon

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#212

Post by hayd »

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

me feel that it needs some tweaking - it's a little annoyingly cute (and could be even terser).

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#213

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

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?

Benchmarks are meaningless. Try it on your own problems and see if it has improved for what you want to use it for.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#214

Post by ambigioz »

So many messages about how Codex is better then Claude from one day to the other, while my experience is exactly the same. Is OpenAI botting the thread? I can't believe this is genuine content.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#215

Post by redml »

aurareturn wrote: post #38
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...

Funny because many people here were so confident that OpenAI is going to collapse because of how much compute they pre-ordered. But now it seems like it's a major strategic advantage. They're 2x'ing usage limits on Codex plans to steal CC customers and it seems to be working. I'm seeing a lot of goodwill for Codex and a ton of bad PR for CC. It seems like 90% of Claude's recent problems are strictly lack of compute r…

they've also introduced a lot of caching and token burn related bugs which makes things worse. any bug that multiplies the token burn also multiplies their infrastructure problems.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#216

Post by PunchTornado »

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.

neah, I believe most people here, which immediately brag about codex, are openai employees doing part of their job. otherwise I couldn't possibly phantom why would anyone use codex. In my company 80% is claude and 15% gemini. you can barely see openai on the graph. and we have >5k programmers using ai every day.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#217

Post by Robdel12 »

It’s funny, a few months ago I would have been pretty excited about this. But I honestly don’t really care because I can’t trust Anthropic to not play games with this over the next month post release.

I just flat out don’t trust them. They’ve shown more than enough that they change things without telling users.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#218

Post by AlecSchueler »

computomatic wrote: post #72
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 was doing some experiments with removing top 100-1000 most common English words from my prompts. My hypothesis was that common words are effectively noise to agents. Based on the first few trials I attempted, there was no discernible difference in output. Would love to compare results with caveman. Caveat: I didn’t do enough testing to find the edge cases (eg, negation).

Doesn't it just use more tokens in reasoning?

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#219

Post by __turbobrew__ »

aurareturn wrote: post #38
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...

Funny because many people here were so confident that OpenAI is going to collapse because of how much compute they pre-ordered. But now it seems like it's a major strategic advantage. They're 2x'ing usage limits on Codex plans to steal CC customers and it seems to be working. I'm seeing a lot of goodwill for Codex and a ton of bad PR for CC. It seems like 90% of Claude's recent problems are strictly lack of compute r…

All of the smart people I know went to work at OpenAI and none at Anthropic. In addition to financial capital, OpenAI has a massive advantage in human capital over Anthropic.

As long as OpenAI can sustain compute and paying SWE $1million/year they will end up with the better product.

Re: Claude Opus 4.7

#220

Post by anthonypasq »

mattas wrote: post #121
aurareturn wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have enough compute for all their customers. OpenAI bet on more compute early on which prompted people to say they're going to go bankrupt and collapse. But now it seems like it's a major strategic advantage. They're 2x'ing usage limits on Codex plans to steal CC customers and it seems to be working. It seems like 90% of Claude's recent problems are strictly lack of compute related.

Hard for me to reconcile the idea that they don't have enough compute with the idea that they are also losing money to subsidies.

they clearly arent losing money, i dont understand why people think this is true
Post reply on HN