Live data from Hacker News

Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

claudecodecamp.com

241–250 of 540 posts

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant reference Toby Ord's work here. I think his framing of the performance/cost frontier hasn't gotten enough attention https://www.tobyord.com/writing/hourly-costs-for-ai-agents

That post doesn't address the human factor of cost, and I don't mean that in a good way. Even if AI costs more than a human, it's tireless, doesn't need holidays, is never going to have to go to HR for sexual harassment issues, won't show up hungover or need an advance to pay for a dying relative's surgery. It can be turned on and off with the flip of a switch. Hire 30 today, fire 25 of them next week. Spin another 5…

it just will delete production database when flustered. no biggie. we learning how to socialize again. cant let all that history go to waste.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#242

It doesn't look good for Anthropic, especially considering they are burning billions in investor money. Looks like they lost the mandate of heaven, if Open AI plays it right it might be their end. Add to that the open source models from China.

1. HN is so unrepresentative of real life. You have people on their $20/$200 subscriptions complaining about usage limits. They are a tiny fraction of Anthropic's revenue. API billing and enterprise is where the money is.

2. Anthropic and OpenAI's financials are totally different. The former has nearly the same RRR and a fraction of the cash burn. There is a reason Anthropic is hot on secondary and OAI isn't

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant reference Toby Ord's work here. I think his framing of the performance/cost frontier hasn't gotten enough attention https://www.tobyord.com/writing/hourly-costs-for-ai-agents

That post doesn't address the human factor of cost, and I don't mean that in a good way. Even if AI costs more than a human, it's tireless, doesn't need holidays, is never going to have to go to HR for sexual harassment issues, won't show up hungover or need an advance to pay for a dying relative's surgery. It can be turned on and off with the flip of a switch. Hire 30 today, fire 25 of them next week. Spin another 5…

Ah-ha, the perfect slave.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#244

The "multiplier" on Github Copilot went from 3 to 7.5. Nice to see that it is actually only 20-30% and Microsoft wanting to lose money slightly slower. https://docs.github.com/fr/copilot/reference/ai-models/suppo...

Yep, and I just made a recommendation that was essentially "never enable Opus 4.7" to my org as a direct result. We have Opus 4.6 (3x) and Opus 4.5 (3x) enabled currently. They are worth it for planning . At 7.5x for 4.7, heck no. It isn't even clear it is an upgrade over Opus 4.6.

7.5 is promotional rate, it will go up to 25. And in May you will be switched to per token billing.

Opus 4.5 and 4.6 will be removed very soon.

So what is your contingency plan?

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#245

A question I've been asking alot lately (really since the release of GPT-5.3) is "do I really need the more powerful model"? I think a big issue with the industry right now is it's constantly chasing higher performing models and that comes at the cost of everything else. What I would love to see in the next few years is all these frontier AI labs go from just trying to create the most powerful model at any cost to ac…

Many people were hoping that Sonnet 4.6 was "Opus 4.5 quality but with Sonnet speed/cost" but unfortunately that didn't pan out.

You can already see people here saying the same stuff about opus 4.7, saw a comment claiming that Opus 4.7 on low thinking was better than 4.6 on high.

I'm not seeing that in my testing, but these opinions are all vibe based anyway.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That post doesn't address the human factor of cost, and I don't mean that in a good way. Even if AI costs more than a human, it's tireless, doesn't need holidays, is never going to have to go to HR for sexual harassment issues, won't show up hungover or need an advance to pay for a dying relative's surgery. It can be turned on and off with the flip of a switch. Hire 30 today, fire 25 of them next week. Spin another 5…

it just will delete production database when flustered. no biggie. we learning how to socialize again. cant let all that history go to waste.

[dead]

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#247

LLMs exist on a logaritmhic performance/cost frontier. It's not really clear whether Opus 4.5+ represent a level shift on this frontier or just inhabits place on that curve which delivers higher performance, but at rapidly diminishing returns to inference cost. To me, it is hard to reject this hypothesis today. The fact that Anthropic is rapidly trying to increase price may betray the fact that their recent lead is a…

heh adaptive thinking is letting the meter run itself. they make more when it runs longer.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, in that case I misunderstood max to mean the subscription, max 20. I am on xhigh.

Ah - xhigh is probably what you want. Their docs suggest xhigh for agentic coding, though judging by their blog high should be better than 4.6 max (ymmv) I've always used high, so maybe I should be using xhigh

I'm actually in the process of switching all of my agents to sonnet, and going to try to drop down to medium.

I used up 1/3rd of my context in less than a day. I am working diligently to do whatever I can to lower token usage.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#249
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need more voices like this to cut through the bullshit. It's fine that people want to tinker with local models, but there has been this narrative for too long that you can just buy more ram and run some small to medium sized model and be productive that way. You just can't, a 35b will never perform at the level of the same gen 500b+ model. It just won't and you are basically working with GPT-4 (the very first one…

> We need more voices like this to cut through the bullshit. Open models are not bullshit, they work fine for many cases and newer techniques like SSD offload make even 500B+ models accessible for simple uses (NOT real-time agentic coding!) on very limited hardware. Of course if you want the full-featured experience it's going to cost a lot.

I fell for this stuff, went into the open+local model rabbit hole, and am finally out of it. What a waste of time and money!

People that love open models dramatically overstate how good the benchmaxxed open models are. They are nowhere near Opus.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#250
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skeptical is a light way to put it. It is essentially a forgone conclusion that once a company IPOs, any veil that they might be working for the global good is entirely lifted. A publicly traded company is legally obligated to go against the global good.

It’s not really, companies like GM used to boast about how well they treated their employees and communities. It was Jack Welch and a legion of like-minded arseholes who decided they should be increasingly richer no matter who or what paid for it.

The previous deal was due to (a) a lower level of development of capitalism (b) a higher profit margin that collapsed in the 70s (c) a communist movement that threatened capital into behaving
Post reply on HN