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

Claude Opus 5

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 5

#561

Post by IanCal »

jjcm wrote: post #359
chriscamargo wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an awesome test! Thanks for sharing the results. Opus 5 is very impressive. Out of curiosity, what app is that Design source of truth screenshot from?

That's from my own tool. I left figma to build a diffusion-based UI tool. Here's a show hn post with some more info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48995754 Edit: Generation was down, back up now. Apparently just hit my $1000 cap for the openai api. Upped it to 10k. Growth!

Huge fan of the non-seat/monthly based pricing. Do you need it to be higher to not just cover costs but also make a profit?

Re: Claude Opus 5

#562

Post by thousand_nights »

thefourthchime wrote: post #504
wuhhh wrote: post #457

It really feels as though my 20 year career as a front end developer is coming to a very abrupt end; at least as I have know it these past two decades.

All software engineering is over as we know it. I haven't written a line of code since December 2025.

same tbh but i feel like we're still required, maybe not in the same numbers as before, and our job description has just changed. it feels more akin to an "AI Agent Operator" or something similar.

i'm still pretty confident someone like my mom wouldn't be able to do my job even with the same access to all the latest LLMs, so we're still providing some value, just in a very different way. whether the market will reprice the cost of our labor, we will see

Re: Claude Opus 5

#563

Post by ahsillyme »

Tried it, Opus 5 is just as conceited and incompetent and Opus 4.8 (and always ego-tripping when facing it's contradictions), think I'll stay with Fable who behaves like a professional without a fragile ego. Sonnet 5 is probably safer for high-assurance applications due to it's non-ego-fragility.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#564

Post by fny »

postalcoder wrote: post #135

I think the most important thing here is not absolute performance. It's that organizations now have access to a Fable-ish model without Fable's 30-day data retention requirement[0]. > "Consistent with prior Opus models, Opus 5 does not have data retention requirements for general access."[1] On the Opus model release page, the reason why Fable doesn't have an ARC-AGI score is because of that retention policy[2]. 0: h…

Anthropic offered ZDR for Fable on AWS bedrock from the beginning.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#566

Post by vinhnx »

cheema33 wrote: post #477
vinhnx wrote: post #273

For anyone wanting a faster overview, I used NotebookLM to create a brief video summary after going through the system card and announcement blog using a cinematic video overview. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUFBhvQ2tY4 . And a podcast companion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYZTW2snXow

Cinematic video link is incorrect. Podcast link is correct.

Thank you, I have had updated the video link here

Video Special | Anthropic's Claude Opus 5 + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vdofv2vQ_M + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-jHHx3J8m8

Re: Claude Opus 5

#567

Post by cjonas »

fny wrote: post #564
postalcoder wrote: post #135

I think the most important thing here is not absolute performance. It's that organizations now have access to a Fable-ish model without Fable's 30-day data retention requirement[0]. > "Consistent with prior Opus models, Opus 5 does not have data retention requirements for general access."[1] On the Opus model release page, the reason why Fable doesn't have an ARC-AGI score is because of that retention policy[2]. 0: h…

Anthropic offered ZDR for Fable on AWS bedrock from the beginning.

Really? I was unable to use it in our account without having to enable the provider_data_share setting...

From the docs[0]:

> To use this model, you must opt in to provider data sharing by setting your data retention mode to provider_data_share via the Data Retention API

0: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/model-c...

Re: Claude Opus 5

#568

Post by abdussamit »

jjcm wrote: post #332

Doing testing with it now, specifically for image->html conversion. Previously Fable was the best at this, followed by Gemini 3.1 pro (a surprising #2, but Google has great vision models). Opus' results seem to be more accurate than Fable, following the design source of truth better. Example results: Design source of truth: https://image.non.io/73e239a3-880f-4793-b65f-4810be2d9378.we... Opus 5 build: https://html.non…

Please share your prompt to convert image to html!

Re: Claude Opus 5

#569

Post by merlindru »

Kwpolska wrote: post #464
deet wrote: post #446

I compared the writing style of Opus 5 vs Fable 5, and Opus 5 continues many of the "Claude-isms" of its 4.8 predecessor in a way that Fable broke away from. Opus 5 still uses "carry the argument", "worth stating plainly", ", and the trap", "The X matters more", the use of "move" We need an "annoying English" benchmark. - Fable 5 Max: https://gist.github.com/deet/3d97f854b48eac6658d642fa18bb24d... - Opus 5 Max: https…

Fable might be using those phrases less, but its writing is still terrible and exhausting to read.

models are hungry for a more information-dense language

for now all they've got is english, so they'll just bend that into shape. it'll do.

Re: Claude Opus 5

#570

Post by vinhnx »

pietz wrote: post #441
vinhnx wrote: post #273

For anyone wanting a faster overview, I used NotebookLM to create a brief video summary after going through the system card and announcement blog using a cinematic video overview. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUFBhvQ2tY4 . And a podcast companion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYZTW2snXow

I think content like this will be the next big challenge. Because it isn't obvious "slop". The voice sounds good, graphics look alright, animations work. People could watch this and feel like some serious time was invested making it. But good god, what a steaming pile of bullshit this is. Completely exaggerated and overly technical language over 235 seconds that could have been explained in 30 to a 12 year old. Trash…

Fair criticism, I understand your finding. It's not everyone's taste, when it from AI-generated contents.
Post reply on HN