Live data from Hacker News

Claude Sonnet 4.5

anthropic.com

61–70 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#61
post #59
post #4

I've really got to refactor my side project which I tailored to just use OpenAI API calls. I think the Anthropic APIs are a bit different so I just never put in the energy to support the changes. I think I remember reading that there are tools to simpify this kind of work, to support multiple LLM APIs? I'm sure I could do it manually but how do you all support multiple API providers that have some differences in the…

LiteLLM is your friend.

or AI SDK

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#62
post #14

Price is playing a big role in my AI usage for coding. I am using Grok Code Fast as it's super cheap. Next to it GPT-5 Codex. If you are paying for model use out of pocket Claude prices are super expensive. With better tooling setup those less smart (and often faster) models can give you better results. I am going to give this another shot but it will cost me $50 just to try it on a real project :(

Same here. I've been using GCF1 with opencode and getting good results. I also started using [Serena](https://github.com/oraios/serena), which has been really helpful in a large codebase. It gives you better search than plain grep, so you can quickly find what you need instead of dumping huge chunks of code into Claude or Grok and wasting tokens.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#63
They really had to release an updated model, I can only imagine how many people cancelled their plans and switched over to Codex over the past month.

I'm glad they at least gave me the full $100 refund.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#64
post #39
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood the point of the pellican on a bicycle exercise: LLMs coding agent doesnt have any way to see the output. It means the only thing this test is testing, is the ability of the LLMs to memorise. Edit: just to show my point, a regular human on a bicycle is way worse with the same model: https://i.imgur.com/flxSJI9.png

Memorise what exactly?

Coordinate and shape of the element used to form a pellican. If you think about how LLMs ingest their data, they have no way to know how to form a pellican in SVG.

I bet their ability to form a pellican result purely because someone already did it before.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pelican on a bicycle benchmark probably getting saturated... especially as it's become a popular way to demonstrate model ability quickly

But where is the training set of good pelicans on bikes coming from? You think they have people jigging them up internally?

Assuming they updated the crawled training data, just having a bunch of examples of specifically pelicans on bicycles from other models is likely to make a difference.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#68
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Anthropic models have been vibe-coding tuned. They're beasts at simple python/ts programs, but they definitely fall apart with scientific/difficult code and large codebases. I don't expect that to change with the new Sonnet.

In my experience Gemini 2.5 Pro is the star when it comes to complex codebases. Give it a single xml from repomix and make sure to use the one at the aistudio.

Yup. In fact every deep research tool on the market is just a wrapper for gemini, their "secret sauce" is just how they partition/pack the codebase to feed it into gemini.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#69
I’m always fascinated by the fine-tuning of LLM personalities. Might we finally get less of the reflexive “You’re absolutely right” with this one?

Maybe we’re entering the Emo Claude era.

Per the system card: In 250k real conversations, Claude Sonnet 4.5 expressed happiness about half as often as Claude 4, though distress remained steady.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#70
I just ran this through a simple change I’ve asked Sonnet 4 and Opus 4.1, and it fails too.

It’s a simple substitution request where I provide a Lint error that suggests the correct change. All the models fail. I could ask someone with no development experience to do this change and they could.

I worry everyone is chasing benchmarks to the detriment of general performance. Or the next token weight for the incorrect change outweigh my simple but precise instructions. Either way it’s no good

Edit: With a followup “please do what I asked” sort of prompt it came through, while Opus just loops. So theres that at least

Post reply on HN