Live data from Hacker News

Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

claudecodecamp.com

371–380 of 540 posts

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not gonna stay that way. Token cost is being massively subsidized right now. Prices will have to start increasing at some point.

Seems like the real costs and numbers are very hidden right now. It’s all private companies and secret info how much anything costs and if anything is profitable.

Some say margins could be up to 90% on API inference. The house always wins?

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#372

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…

[dead]

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#373
post #360
post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That. We already shipped 3 things this year built using Claude. The biggest one was porting two native apps into one react native app - which was originally estimated to be a 6-7 month project for a 9 FTE team, and ended up being a 2 months project with 2 people. To me, the economic value of a claude subscription used right is in the range of 10-40k eur, depending on the type of work and the developer driving it. If…

Who's going to review that output for accuracy? We'll leave performance and security as unnecessary luxuries in this age and time. In my experience, even Claude 4.6's output can't be trusted blindly it'll write flawed code and would write tests that would be testing that flawed code giving false sense of confidence and accomplishment only to be revealed upon closer inspection later. Additionally - it's age old known…

Well it's all tradeoffs, right? 6 months for 9 FTEs is 54 man months. 2 months for 2 FTEs is 4 man months. Even if one FTE spent two extra months perusing every line of code and reviewing, that's still 6 man months, resulting in almost 10x speed.

Let's say you dont review. Those two extra months probably turns into four extra months of finding bugs and stuff. Still 8 man months vs 54.

Of course this is all assuming that the original estimates were correct. IME building stuff using AI in greenfield projects is gold. But using AI in brownfield projects is only useful if you primarily use AI to chat to your codebase and to make specific scoped changes, and not actually make large changes.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#374

Anybody else having problem getting Opus 4.7 to write code? I had it pick up a month-old project, some small one off scripts that I want to modify, and it refused to even touch the code. So far it costs a lot less, because I'm not going to be using it.

> it refused to even touch the code.

???

please i beg post the prompt and the refusal

I literally can not imagine a model refusing to do something

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#375
post #360
post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That. We already shipped 3 things this year built using Claude. The biggest one was porting two native apps into one react native app - which was originally estimated to be a 6-7 month project for a 9 FTE team, and ended up being a 2 months project with 2 people. To me, the economic value of a claude subscription used right is in the range of 10-40k eur, depending on the type of work and the developer driving it. If…

Who's going to review that output for accuracy? We'll leave performance and security as unnecessary luxuries in this age and time. In my experience, even Claude 4.6's output can't be trusted blindly it'll write flawed code and would write tests that would be testing that flawed code giving false sense of confidence and accomplishment only to be revealed upon closer inspection later. Additionally - it's age old known…

I don't want to defend LLM written code, but this is true regardless if code is written by a person or a machine. There are engineers that will put the time to learn and optimize their code for performance and focus on security and there are others that won't. That has nothing to do with AI writing code. There is a reason why most software is so buggy and all software has identified security vulnerabilities, regardless of who wrote it.

I remember how website security was before frameworks like Django and ROR added default security features. I think we will see something similar with coding agents, that just will run skills/checks/mcps/... that focus have performance, security, resource management, ... built in.

I have done this myself. For all apps I build I have linters, static code analyzers, etc running at the end of each session. It's cheapest default in a very strict mode. Cleans up most of the obvious stuff almost for free.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#376
post #360
post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That. We already shipped 3 things this year built using Claude. The biggest one was porting two native apps into one react native app - which was originally estimated to be a 6-7 month project for a 9 FTE team, and ended up being a 2 months project with 2 people. To me, the economic value of a claude subscription used right is in the range of 10-40k eur, depending on the type of work and the developer driving it. If…

Who's going to review that output for accuracy? We'll leave performance and security as unnecessary luxuries in this age and time. In my experience, even Claude 4.6's output can't be trusted blindly it'll write flawed code and would write tests that would be testing that flawed code giving false sense of confidence and accomplishment only to be revealed upon closer inspection later. Additionally - it's age old known…

Minor point: AI doesn’t write, it generates.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. I think we're reaching the point where more developers need to start right-sizing the model and effort level to the task. It was easy to get comfortable with using the best model at the highest setting for every…

> It was easy to get comfortable with using the best model at the highest setting for everything for a while, but as the models continue to scale and reasoning token budgets grow, that's no longer a safe default unless you have unlimited budgets. For a while I used Cerebras Code for 50 USD a month with them running a GLM model and giving you millions of tokens per day . It did a lot of heavy lifting in a software mig…

The GLM-4.7 model isn't that great. I was on their $200/month plan for a while. It was really hard to keep up with how fast it works. Going back to Claude seems like everything takes forever. GLM got much better in 5.1 but Cerebras still doesn't offer that yet (it's a bit heavier). I have a year of Z.ai that I got as a bargain and I use GLM-5.1 for some open source stuff but I am a bit nervous about sending data into their API.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#378
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't. These are not "issues", it's them trying to push the models to burn less compute. It will only get worse.

> it's them trying to push the models to burn less compute I'm curious, how does using more tokens save compute?

I'm 99.9% sure Opus 4.7 is a smaller model than 4.6.

Too many signs between the sudden jump in TPS (biggest smoking gun for me), new tokenenizer, commentary about Project Mythos from Ant employees, etc.

It looks like their new Sonnet was good enough to be labeled Opus and their new Opus was good enough to be labeled Mythos.

They'll probably continue post-training and release a more polished version as Opus 5

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#379
post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human dev labor cost is still the high pole in the tent, even multiplying today's subsidized subscription cost by 10x. If the capability improvement trajectory continues, developers should prepare for a new economy where more productivity is achieved by fewer devs by shifting substantial labor budget to AI.

Your employer doesn’t pay the subscription cost, they pay per token. So it’s already way more than 10x the cost.

Depends on the type of subscription. We have Codex Team and have a monthly subscription, no per-token costs.

Re: Measuring Claude 4.7's tokenizer costs

#380
depends if you're running Opus for everything vs tiering. my pipeline: Haiku 4.5 for ~70% of implementation, Sonnet 4 for one review step, Opus 4.5 only for planning and final synthesis

claude code on opus continuously = whole bill. different measurement.

haiku 4.5 is good enough for fanout. opus earns it on synthesis where you need long context + complex problem solving under constraints

Post reply on HN