Live data from Hacker News

Claude Sonnet 4.5

anthropic.com

601–610 of 819 posts

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#601
post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still says "Perfect!" about its own work far too often.

In fairness that sounds like me when I code. It's either "Perfect!" or "Genius!". Or conversely "I'm a complete idiot!"

I'm more of a "Kneel before Zod" kind of guy

Wonder if I could Claude to do that

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#602
post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this getting downvoted? It was hilarious! I actually added a fun thing to my user-wide CLAUDE.md, basically saying that it should come up with a funny insult every time I come up with an idea that wasn't technically sound (I got the prompt from someone else). It seems to be disobeying me, because I refuse to believe that I don't have bad ideas. Or some other prompt is overriding it.

This is brilliant! Can you give me some pointers? Ie : if I make a request that seems dumb tell me custom instruction?

0x3a28213a 0x6339392c 0x7363682e

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#603
So far I'm liking that it seems to follow my CLAUDE.md instructions better, doing more frequent checkins with me to ask me to review what it's done, etc, and taking my advice more.

What I'm not liking is it seems even... lazier... than previously. By which I mean the classic "This is getting complicated so..." (followed by cop-out, dropping the original task and motivation).

There's also a bug where compaction becomes impossible. ("conversation too long" and its advice on how to fix doesn't work)

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#604
What impressed me most about Claude Sonnet 4.5 is that its output structure is more stable than many other models and less prone to crashes. I ran some real world scripts from my own projects, and it exhibited fewer hallucinations than GPT-4 and performed more faithfully on code interpretation tasks. However, it can be a bit slow to warm up, and sometimes I needed more prompts in the first few rounds.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#605

So far I'm liking that it seems to follow my CLAUDE.md instructions better, doing more frequent checkins with me to ask me to review what it's done, etc, and taking my advice more. What I'm not liking is it seems even... lazier... than previously. By which I mean the classic "This is getting complicated so..." (followed by cop-out, dropping the original task and motivation). There's also a bug where compaction become…

> There's also a bug where compaction becomes impossible. ("conversation too long" and its advice on how to fix doesn't work)

I have seen this issue with every model so far

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#606
post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you thought about benchmarking models a month or two after release to see how it competes vs the day 1 release

For that to be useful I'd need to be running much better benchmarks - anything less than a few hundred numerically scored tasks would be unlikely to reliably identity differences. An organization like Artificial Analysis would be a better fit for that kind of investigation: https://artificialanalysis.ai/

Manually,

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40859434 :

> E.g promptfoo and chainforge have multi-LLM workflows.

> Promptfoo has a YAML configuration for prompts, providers,: https://www.promptfoo.dev/docs/configuration/guide/

openai/evals//docs/build-eval.md: https://github.com/openai/evals/blob/main/docs/build-eval.md

From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45267271 ;

> API facades like OpenLLM and model routers like OpenRouter have standard interfaces for many or most LLM inputs and outputs. Tools like Promptfoo, ChainForge, and LocalAI also all have abstractions over many models.

> What are the open standards for representing LLM inputs, and outputs?

> W3C PROV has prov:Entity, prov:Activity, and prov:Agent for modeling AI provenance: who or what did what when.

> LLM evals could be represented in W3C EARL Evaluation and Reporting Language

"Can Large Language Models Emulate Judicial Decision-Making? [Paper]" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42927611

"California governor signs AI transparency bill into law" (2025) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45418428 :

> https://sb53.info/

Is this the first of its sort?:

> CalCompute

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#607
post #33
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 :(

I'm paying $90(?) a month for the Max and it holds up for about an hour or so of in depth coding before it kicks in the 5-hour window lockout (so effectively about 4 hours of time when I can't run it). Kinda frustrating, even with efficient prompt and context length conservation techniques. I'm going to test this new sonnet 4.5, now but it'll probably be just as quick to gobble my credits.

You have got to have some extremely large files or something. Even with only Opus, running into the limits with the Max subscription is almost impossible unless you really try.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#608
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini 2.5 Pro = Long context king, image input king GPT-5 = Overengineering/complexity/"enterprise" king Claude = "Get straightforwaed shit done efficiently" king

On the plus side, GPT5 is very malleable, so you CAN prompt it away from that, whereas it's very hard to prompt Claude into producing hard code: even with a nearly file by file breakdown of a task, it'll occasionally run into an obstacle and just give up and make a mock or top implementation, basically diverge from the entire plan, then do its own version.

Absolutely, sometimes you want, or indeed need such complexity. Some work in settings where they would want it all of the time. IMHO, most people, most of the time don't really want it, and don't want to have to prompt it every time to avoid it. That's why I think it's still very useful to build up experience with the three frontier models, so you can choose according to the situation.

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#609
It does well with screenshot-calculus for me. For example, I pasted a screenshot of the Layer Norm equation into Claude Code 2 and asked:

"Differentiate y(x) w.r.t x, gamma and beta."

It not only produced the correct result, but it understood the context - I didn't tell it the context was layer norm, back-propagation and matrices.

This release is a step function for my use cases.

My screenshot came from here: https://docs.pytorch.org/docs/stable/generated/torch.nn.Laye...

Re: Claude Sonnet 4.5

#610
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 :(

I really struggle to see the usecase of Grok Code Fast when you have Qwen 3 Coder right there providing much better outputs while still being fast and cheap.
Post reply on HN