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

Claude Opus 4.8

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#851

Post by zuzululu »

senko wrote: post #385

My fav coding benchmark for frontier models is to build a simple RTS game in one file (js/html/css). Claude Code with Opus 4.8 in ultracode mode nailed it, the best result so far: https://bsky.app/profile/senko.net/post/3mmwnrkwboc2v The prompt was: Create a simple but functional real time strategy (RTS) game similar to old WarCraft, StarCraft or Command & Conquer games. The player should be able to build buildings,…

some reason that website is showing up as high risk and i cannot view it , I had to open it from my mobile phone.

it looks quite impressive, I don't use claude currently but hearing good things about it...from codex users ironically

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#852

Post by tornikeo »

thombles wrote: post #844

Today I was a few hours into chasing down a very tricky timing-dependent bug with GPT 5.5 and we were starting to go into circles. I noticed Opus 4.8 had showed up in GitHub Copilot so I switched over and pointed it at my notes so far. Another hour of steady progress and it tracked it down to some missing synchronisation in an upstream library which was occasionally corrupting a linked list. N=1 but worth every one o…

GPT 5.5 feels worse than 5.4 for the last few weeks. Again N=1, but would be interested to see how opus 4.8 and gpt 5.4 match

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#853

Post by zuzululu »

raincole wrote: post #154
wg0 wrote: post #104

There is a hole in the boat's bottom due to Chinese models. They might not be as good but they are not bad either or at least I had hard time finding any issues with Deepseekv4 Flash and Pro variants. They get their job done sometimes rarely giving up till they are done what they are after. So even for enterprise deployments, as the dust settles down, CFO/CTOs might find out that deploying on an internal cluster of G…

I had been saying this on HN repeatedly: people are going to use the smartest models for coding. They don't care how cheap your tokens are if they don't have the highest probability of solving your programming tasks. And I was dead wrong. Now I mostly use DeepSeek Pro myself.

you weren't wrong your tasks/problems didn't warrant a frontier model and it was always solvable with a cheap chinese model

doesn't invalidate the rest of us working on tough problems that demand more expensive models and valuable enough to justify it

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#854

Post by zuzululu »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #719
square_usual wrote: post #87

Buried lede: > We have increased rate limits in Claude Code to accommodate the higher token usage of higher effort levels

That really is some good news. Looks like they also reset everyone's weekly usage too.

Do you think Claude Max is worth it ? It seems cheaper than Codex Pro too

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#855

Post by thombles »

zuzululu wrote: post #849
thombles wrote: post #844

Today I was a few hours into chasing down a very tricky timing-dependent bug with GPT 5.5 and we were starting to go into circles. I noticed Opus 4.8 had showed up in GitHub Copilot so I switched over and pointed it at my notes so far. Another hour of steady progress and it tracked it down to some missing synchronisation in an upstream library which was occasionally corrupting a linked list. N=1 but worth every one o…

That is interesting, are you saying that GPT 5.5 could not fix an issue that Opus 4.8 did? Are you sure this is not due to fresh context? I do notice this tendency for 5.5 to go in endless circles.

That's my initial experience, yes. It's hard to compare these things cleanly of course. I went through several new contexts on GPT and it just couldn't get traction -- it became hard to keep it focused on "yes there's clearly a race but what actual persistent state got broken"? It just wanted to change the thread priorities so that the problem didn't occur and kept doubling down on that as the solution. Opus made some missteps too but it responded well to my corrections - 2 or 3 significant ones along the way - and it was prepared to keep digging on my exact goal until it found the real issue.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#856

Post by zuzululu »

nba456_ wrote: post #198
SimianSci wrote: post #28

There is an obvious shift in sentiment amongst users, at least here in the US. I feel it myself, even as a proponent of AI tools, the bloviating and language that these companies use in these release articles are starting to wear thin on my patience. Its possible we might just be witnessing a shift in fashion, where this type of sentimentality was more acceptable when it was novel and new, but now it just appears out…

I don't agree at all for these coding models. Even the most anti-AI people from last year seem to be giving in to using them.

I am noticing a shift here too, those that were its biggest critics have gotten more silent, I guess they do have some small amount of self awareness and shame left, which is always a good thing.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#857

Post by notrealyme123 »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #136
NiloCK wrote: post #77

A rambling comment: I think this is the first time we've had a third minor version bump on a frontier Anthropic model. (I count the 0.5s as major here, because they've been issued non-sequentially and also corresponded to massive capability leaps, eg, Sonnet 3.5, Opus 4.5). So now the Opus 4.5 family has successors 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8, each posting fairly modest claimed gains. My own experience w/ 4.6 and 4.7 are that…

I won't be surprised if the next gen frontier models are the last. There's orders of magnitude of low hanging juice to squeeze out of smaller models. It is almost guaranteed that a 60-90B model can outperform current SOTA in coding tasks within 2-3 years (design not certain, probably unlikely). It is far less clear that a 1.2T model will be meaningfully better enough to justify training it. As far as reasoning is con…

The GRAM model is so much into my research direction, I love it. Thank you for posting it.

Where do I find papers like this? Outside of hacker news comments. It's so hard to find the good stuff in all the noise IMO.

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#858

Post by zuzululu »

dudeinhawaii wrote: post #395

This is the first time I saw a model pop-up on HN and didn't really care. Model exhaustion? It looks interesting but not exciting. While I'd normally _love_ incremental improvements --- I think the recent ones are far too minor to get excited about or change up a workflow. Besides, benchmarks tend to exaggerate the gap between versions. At this point I'd almost rather Anthropic wait and really wow us with a 5.0 relea…

Great. The rest of us find this model exciting because I think it's the first time there have been meaningful improvement to Claude.

I think I need to purchase a plan to be sure tho but from all the anecdotes I've read so far, this is a significant milestone from Anthropic.

I actually think they have a shot against Codex now

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#859

Post by zuzululu »

viking123 wrote: post #825
eshack94 wrote: post #571

The Claude Pro subscription is basically useless at this point, in terms of usage limits with respect to the settings required to achieve actual useful output.

Meanwhile with 20 bucks a month for gpt plus, you can get shit ton of usage out of gpt 5.5 on codex if you know what you are doing and not just letting it swallow the whole project like an idiot.

One needs to browse r/codex to realize that statement is simply not true....

Claude appears to have more or less matched the usage that Codex appears

Re: Claude Opus 4.8

#860

Post by redfloatplane »

dannyw wrote: post #749
Frannky wrote: post #736

I use 4.6, because 4.7 is super lazy, deflects responsibility, and assumes it is good and I am bad, and avoids checking reality. It looks like it's trained on lazy humans instead of good engineers. Should I try 4.8? I am happy with 4.6. I am not happy with 4.7.

I still use 4.7. I don’t know what I’m doing wrong but 4.7 frequently tells me to it’s time to sleep at all hours of the day while working. I’ve tried clearing all my memory/agents files. I’m hoping the “go to sleep” behavior has been rlhf’d away in 4.8.

I also had this behaviour sometimes, it’s specifically called out in the system card in section 6.2.1.1 - although I didn’t actually see if they said they decisively fixed the issue.
Post reply on HN