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

Claude Opus 4.5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 525 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#261

Post by AtNightWeCode »

llamasushi wrote: post #30

The burying of the lede here is insane. $5/$25 per MTok is a 3x price drop from Opus 4. At that price point, Opus stops being "the model you use for important things" and becomes actually viable for production workloads. Also notable: they're claiming SOTA prompt injection resistance. The industry has largely given up on solving this problem through training alone, so if the numbers in the system card hold up under a…

The cost of tokens in the docs is pretty much a worthless metric for these models. Only way to go is to plug it in and test it. My experience is that Claude is an expert at wasting tokens on nonsense. Easily 5x up on output tokens comparing to ChatGPT and then consider that Claude waste about 2-3x of tokens more by default.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#262

Post by qingcharles »

config_yml wrote: post #56
Squarex wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have heard that gemini 3 is not that great in cursor, but excellent in Antigravity. I don't have a time to personally verify all that though.

I‘ve had no success using Antigravity, which is a shame because the ideas are promising, but the execution so far is underwhelming. Haven‘t gotten past an initial plannin doc which is usually aborted due to model provider overload or rate limiting.

I've had really good success with Antigrav. It's a little bit rough around the edges as it's a VS Code fork so things like C# Dev Kit won't install.

I just get rate-limited constantly and have to wait for it to reset.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#263

Post by adidoit »

Tested this building some PRs and issues that codex-5.1-max and gemini-3-pro were strugglig with

It planned way better in a much more granular way and then execute it better. I can't tell if the model is actually better or if it's just planning with more discipline

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#264

Post by qingcharles »

dreis_sw wrote: post #208
simonw wrote: post #100

Notes and two pelicans: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Nov/24/claude-opus/

I agree with your sentiment, this incremental evolution is getting difficult to feel when working with code, especially with large enterprise codebases. I would say that for the vast majority of tasks there is a much bigger gap on tooling than on foundational model capability.

Also came to say the same thing. When Gemini 3 came out several people asked me "Is it better than Opus 4.1?" but I could no longer answer it. It's too hard to evaluate consistently across a range of tasks.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#265

Post by typpilol »

blinding-streak wrote: post #222
all2 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly, I canceled my Claude subscription. I've paid through the first week of December, so it dries up on the 7th of December. As soon as I had canceled, Claude Code started performing substantially better. I gave it a design spec (a very loose design spec) and it one-shotted it. I'll grant that it was a collection of docker containers and a web API, but still. I've not seen that level of performance from Cla…

That's really interesting. After cancelling, it goes into retention mode, akin to when one cancels other online services? For example, I cancelled Peacock the other day and it offered a deal of $1.99/mo for 6 months if I stayed. Very intriguing, curious if others have seen this.

I got this on the dominos pizza app recently. I clicked the bread sticks by mistake and clocked out, and a pop up came up and offered me the bread sticks for $1.99 as well.

So now whenever I get Dominos I click and back out of everything to get any free coupons

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#266

Post by nextworddev »

pants2 wrote: post #152
Scene_Cast2 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still way pricier (>2x) than Gemini 3 and Grok 4. I've noticed that the latter two also perform better than Opus 4, so I've stopped using Opus.

Don't be so sure - while I haven't tested Opus 4.5 yet, Gemini 3 tends to use way more tokens than Sonnet 4.5. Like 5-10X more. So Gemini might end up being more expensive in practice.

[flagged]

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#267

Post by tmaly »

sqs wrote: post #186
llamasushi wrote: post #30

The burying of the lede here is insane. $5/$25 per MTok is a 3x price drop from Opus 4. At that price point, Opus stops being "the model you use for important things" and becomes actually viable for production workloads. Also notable: they're claiming SOTA prompt injection resistance. The industry has largely given up on solving this problem through training alone, so if the numbers in the system card hold up under a…

What's super interesting is that Opus is cheaper all-in than Sonnet for many usage patterns. Here are some early rough numbers from our own internal usage on the Amp team (avg cost $ per thread): - Sonnet 4.5: $1.83 - Opus 4.5: $1.30 (earlier checkpoint last week was $1.55) - Gemini 3 Pro: $1.21 Cost per token is not the right way to look at this. A bit more intelligence means mistakes (and wasted tokens) avoided.

what is the typical usage pattern that would result in these cost figures?

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#268

Post by idonotknowwhy »

unsupp0rted wrote: post #46

This is gonna be game-changing for the next 2-4 weeks before they nerf the model. Then for the next 2-3 months people complaining about the degradation will be labeled “skill issue”. Then a sacrificial Anthropic engineer will “discover” a couple obscure bugs that “in some cases” might have lead to less than optimal performance. Still largely a user skill issue though. Then a couple months later they’ll release Opus 4…

100%. They've been nerfing the model periodically since at least Sonnet 3.5, but this time it's so bad I ended up swapping out to GLM4.6 just to finish off a simple feature.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#269

Post by PilotJeff »

More blowing up of the bubble with anthropic essentially offering compute/LLM for below cost. Eventually the laws of physics/market will take over and look out below.

Re: Claude Opus 4.5

#270

Post by testdelacc1 »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #113
losvedir wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost scrolled past the "Safety" section, because in the past it always seemed sort of silly sci-fi scaremongering (IMO) or things that I would classify as "sharp tool dangerous in the wrong hands". But I'm glad I stopped, because it actually talked about real, practical issues like the prompt injections that you mention. I wonder if the industry term "safety" is pivoting to refer to other things now.

I thought AI safety was dumb/unimportant until I saw this dataset of dangerous prompts: https://github.com/mlcommons/ailuminate/blob/main/airr_offic... I don't love the idea of knowledge being restricted... but I also think these tools could result in harm to others in the wrong hands

Is the whole file on that same theme? I’m not usually one to ask someone else to read a link for me, but I’ll ask here.
Post reply on HN