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.
How would you know what the cost is?
Claude Opus 4.5
271–280 of 525 posts
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#272This 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…
With Claude specifically I've grown confident they have been sneakily experimenting with context compression to save money and doing a very bad job at it. However for this same reason one shot batch usage or one off questions & answers that don't depend on larger context windows don't seem to see this degradation.
They added a "How is claude doing?" rating a while back which backs this statement up imo. Tons of A/B tests going on i bet.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are well documented cases of performance degradation: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/a-postmortem-of-three-... . The real issue is that there is no reliable system currently in place for the end user (other than being willing to burn the cash and run your own benchmarks regularly) to detect changes in performance. It feels to me like a perfect storm. A combination of high cost of inference, extreme compe…
> There are well documented cases of performance degradation: https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/a-postmortem-of-three-... There was one well-documented case of performance degradation which arose from a stupid bug, not some secret cost cutting measure.
I never claimed that it was being done in secrecy. Here is another example: https://groq.com/blog/inside-the-lpu-deconstructing-groq-spe....
I have seen multiple people mention openrouter multiple times here on HN: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Again, I'm not claiming malicious intent. But model performance depends on a number of factors and the end-user just sees benchmarks for a specific configuration. For me to have a high degree of confidence in a provider I would need to see open and continuous benchmarking of the end-user API.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#274SWE's results were actually very close, but they used a poor marketing visualization. I know this isn't a research paper, but for Anthropic, I expect more.
They should've used an error rate instead of the pass rate. Then it'll get the same visual appeal without cheating.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
This feels like a dumb question, but why doesn't Cursor implement that tool? I built my own simple coding agent six months ago, and I implemented str_replace_based_edit_tool ( https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/agents-and-tools/tool-us... ) for Claude to use; it wasn't hard to do.
Maybe this is a flippant response, but I guess they are more of a UI company and want to avoid competing with the frontier model companies? They also can’t get at the models directly enough, so anything they layer in would seem guaranteed to underperform and/or consume context instead of potentially relieving that pressure. Any LLM-adjacent infrastructure they invest in risks being obviated before they can get users…
They did release the Composer model and people praise the speed of it.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's not about the terminal, but about decoupling yourself from looking at the code. The Claude app lets you interact with a github repo from your phone.
This is not the way these agents are not up to the task of writing production level code at any meaningful scale looking forward to high paying gigs to go in and clean up after people take them too far and the hype cycle fades --- I recommend the opposite, work on custom agents so you have a better understanding of how these things work and fail. Get deep in the code to understand how context and values flow and get…
> these agents are not up to the task of writing production level code at any meaningful scale
This is obviously not true, starting with the AI companies themselves.
It's like the old saying "half of all advertising doesn't work; we just don't which half that is." Some organizations are having great results, while some are not. From the multiple dev podcasts I've listened to by AI skeptics have had a lightbulb moment where they get AI is where everything is headed.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
> only Claude Code has been able to really solve; Sonnet 4.5 in there consistently performs better than Sonnet 4.5 anywhere else. I think part of it is this[0] and I expect it will become more of a problem. Claude models have built-in tools (e.g. `str_replace_editor`) which they've been trained to use. These tools don't exist in Cursor, but claude really wants to use them. 0 - https://x.com/thisritchie/status/1944038…
TIL! I'll finally give Claude Code a try. I've been using Cursor since it launched and never tried anything else. The terminal UI didn't appeal to me, but knowing it has better performance, I'll check it out. Cursor has been a terrible experience lately, regardless of the model. Sometimes for the same task, I need to try with Sonnet 4.5, ChatGPT 5.1 Codex, Gemini Pro 3... and most times, none managed to do the work,…
Glad you mentioned "Cursor has been a terrible experience lately", as I was planning to finally give it a try. I'd heard it has the best auto-complete, which I don't get use VSCode with Claude Code in the terminal.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
> only Claude Code has been able to really solve; Sonnet 4.5 in there consistently performs better than Sonnet 4.5 anywhere else. I think part of it is this[0] and I expect it will become more of a problem. Claude models have built-in tools (e.g. `str_replace_editor`) which they've been trained to use. These tools don't exist in Cursor, but claude really wants to use them. 0 - https://x.com/thisritchie/status/1944038…
TIL! I'll finally give Claude Code a try. I've been using Cursor since it launched and never tried anything else. The terminal UI didn't appeal to me, but knowing it has better performance, I'll check it out. Cursor has been a terrible experience lately, regardless of the model. Sometimes for the same task, I need to try with Sonnet 4.5, ChatGPT 5.1 Codex, Gemini Pro 3... and most times, none managed to do the work,…
I get the same impression. Even GPT 5.1 Codex is just sooo slow in Cursor. Claude Code with Sonnet is still the benchmkar. Fast and good.
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#279I've played around with Gemini 3 Pro in Cursor, and honestly: I find it to be significantly worse than Sonnet 4.5. I've also had some problems that only Claude Code has been able to really solve; Sonnet 4.5 in there consistently performs better than Sonnet 4.5 anywhere else. I think Anthropic is making the right decisions with their models. Given that software engineering is probably one of the very few domains of AI…
I gave Sonnet 4.5 a base64 encoded PHP serialize() json of an object dump and told him to extraxt the URL within. It gave me the Youtube-URL to Rick Astley.
Almost any modern LLM can do this, even GPT-OSS
Re: Claude Opus 4.5
#280I've played around with Gemini 3 Pro in Cursor, and honestly: I find it to be significantly worse than Sonnet 4.5. I've also had some problems that only Claude Code has been able to really solve; Sonnet 4.5 in there consistently performs better than Sonnet 4.5 anywhere else. I think Anthropic is making the right decisions with their models. Given that software engineering is probably one of the very few domains of AI…
My testing of Gemini 3 Pro in Cursor yielded mixed results. Sometimes it's phenomenal. At other times I either get the "provider overloaded" message (after like 5 mins or whatever the timeout is), or the model's internal monologue starts spilling out to the chat window, which becomes really messy and unreadable. It'll do things like: >> I'll execute. >> I'll execute. >> Wait, what if...? >> I'll execute. Suffice it t…
[deleted]