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

Claude: Elevated Error Rates for Opus 4.8, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, and Sonnet 4.6

status.claude.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: Claude: Elevated Error Rates for Opus 4.8, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, and Sonnet 4.6

#33

Post by trollbridge »

behnamoh wrote: post #7

Times like this remind me that despite GLM and Codex and other models being hyped up as Claude Opus 4.8 replacements, I still would not trust them with my most important work. For example, right now I'm working on a huge refactoring project, and even Opus has struggled with it after several days. I cannot even imagine how GLM, Codex, or other models would handle this. So the only option for me is to wait until this o…

z.ai has subscription based plans if you want to use them to use GLM. (Same for Codex, although I'm not going to pretend GPT-5.5 is as strong of a model as Opus.)

I would give GLM a try. I'm shocked at how well it's been able to handle some things I've thrown at it.

Re: Claude: Elevated Error Rates for Opus 4.8, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, and Sonnet 4.6

#34

Post by jliptzin »

behnamoh wrote: post #7

Times like this remind me that despite GLM and Codex and other models being hyped up as Claude Opus 4.8 replacements, I still would not trust them with my most important work. For example, right now I'm working on a huge refactoring project, and even Opus has struggled with it after several days. I cannot even imagine how GLM, Codex, or other models would handle this. So the only option for me is to wait until this o…

It depends what you’re doing. I have no problem using an open source model to build a static website or other simple tasks. And of course, open source is catching up and the things you can trust it with grows every month.

Not to mention the way the proprietary models patronize you if they think you’re up to no good. The other day I was trying to use Claude to transcribe a song on YouTube to sheet music; the link was broken and it had not been available for purchase for years. Of course I first had to prove to Claude that I was not just being cheap and trying to get around paying the $5 for the download, which I would have had no problem with. “I am going to be up front with you —- my research raises some red flags with your initial premise that the sheet music is no longer available…”

I think in the next 5-10 years inference costs will come down substantially and the open source models will get so advanced that only someone in an extremely niche, cutting edge field will need a frontier model. Everyone else will have a dedicated box somewhere on their network that runs their LLM of choice. No tokens, none of your data getting sent to a third party, no arguing with it over whether or not a link is actually broken or if you’re just trying to be cheap.

I think OpenAI and Anthropic realize this which is the reason they’re in a rush to go public.

Re: Claude: Elevated Error Rates for Opus 4.8, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, and Sonnet 4.6

#37

Post by viraptor »

behnamoh wrote: post #19
mixtureoftakes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah and lets not forget codex and glm have subscriptions too, with even more usage per dollar

but they also burn more tokens per task, so in the end, Claude comes out as the more efficient one, despite giving you less tokens.

You've got it backwards. Opus is the token/money burning one https://deepswe.datacurve.ai/

Gpt 5.5 uses a third of the opus 4.8 tokens for the same task and scores higher. Glm 5.2 was worse in quality but used half the tokens - 5.3 is not tested yet but will be higher.

Re: Claude: Elevated Error Rates for Opus 4.8, Opus 4.7, Opus 4.6, and Sonnet 4.6

#39

Post by deminature »

Opus 4.8 is nearly unusable at the moment. Making extremely obvious errors, failing to debug issues even after being prompted with the exact line of code where the problem is. It should be illegal not to disclose serious degradations of performance while still charging full price. It may just be my region's datacentres degraded or something. The company is so opaque about what's happening, it's impossible to know what is actually going on.

The optimistic take is they're preparing to relaunch Fable 5 in the next day or so and siphoning off power for that. Perhaps they're doing a snap retraining to strip out any cybersecurity capability.

Post reply on HN