8 ms·

Also the cost per task. It appears to be significantly cheaper, cheaper than sonnet!

• qsera 2mo ago
  I can't help but read these comments in the voice of a TV commercial....
  • iambateman 2mo ago
    Ask your doctor if Opus 5 is right for you. Side effects include occasional hallucination, security breaches and unwanted React apps. Some developers have reported receiving entire apps from untrained executives who may or may not know what they’re doing. Stop using Opus immediately if you experience signs of dizziness or vomiting. Opus 5…the people’s favorite.
    • ahofmann 2mo ago
      Spot on! Comment of the month, I'd say.
    • a012 2mo ago
      But … but … but 9 out of 10 doctors recommended Opus
    • andrekandre 2mo ago
      > and unwanted React apps stares at codex "native" app that is actually react/electron [0] [0] https://www.kitze.io/posts/codex-electron-app-technical-breakdown https://www.kitze.io/posts/codex-electron-app-technical-brea...
    • silverlimetea 2mo ago
      > unwanted React apps Treat like acne - target the Node and .pop() to eject
• x313 2mo ago
  The numbers from Anthropic seem heavily cherry-picked, Artificial Analysis has Opus 5 at 1.25x the cost of Sonnet and 2x the cost of GPT 5.6 and K3. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=cost-per-task https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=cost-per-task
  • reinitctxoffset 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    • idiotsecant 2mo ago
      I feel like I am having a stroke. What is this
      • reinitctxoffset 2mo ago
        [flagged]
      • throwawayoaky 2mo ago
        looks like the agent-judged results of an agent-built 'eval' based on some examples derived from this person's real work. and clearly part of a larger document. this kind of slop is kind of useful but opus 4 was the first generation that was any good at writing its own prompts/evals/rubrics so there's a certain sloop to it..
  • SwellJoe 2mo ago
    I don't understand how the K3 numbers keep coming out cheap for people. I recently started to add it to my security auditing benchmarks and found it was going to cost about twice as much as Opus 4.8. It blew through the $100 budget I'd set at like 11%. In the tasks I'm doing it seems crazy expensive because it chews so much, burning a tremendous amount of tokens.
    • InsideOutSanta 2mo ago
      I think the way people usually compare pricing is fundamentally flawed. You can't compare token prices because different models use different tokenizers, and you can't compare tokenizer-normalized token prices because different models at different settings use more or fewer tokens to complete the same task at a different level of quality. Based on my entirely subjective experience, the $100 Moonshot plan using only K3 is comparable to the $200 Anthropic deal using the whole Fable allocation and Opus 4.8 for the rest.
• onlyrealcuzzo 2mo ago
  I can't believe they released the charts they did. It basically shows that Sol absolutely demolishes Fable at every part of the cost curve for coding for the same level of quality. Opus is competitive. It just has a higher level of quality / higher cost to start.
  • pixl97 2mo ago
    If fable costs more to run than the markup they still come out ahead.
  • throw10920 2mo ago
    Isn't that because Fable/Mythos were tuned for cyber at the expense of general performance?
    • pluralmonad 2mo ago
      I have no idea, but that would be weird considering Fable refuses to do anything within 10 miles of security.
• manojlds 2mo ago
  Opus 4.8 was already shown to be cheaper than Sonnet 5 when Sonnet 5 was released (by Anthropic)
• benjiro29 2mo ago
  Also the cost per task. https://www.vals.ai/benchmarks/vals_index https://www.vals.ai/benchmarks/vals_index !!! Vals !!! Vals Index Opus 4.8 > 5.0 goes from $2.90 to $8.54, for 4% gain ... That is a massive cost increase. Sure, 20% cheaper then Fable, but that is a 3x price increase compared to Opus 4.8 in that test. https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-opus-5 https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-opus-5 https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-opus-5#price-cost https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/claude-opus-5#price-cos... !!! artificial analysis !! Cost per task is second highest, right below Fable. * Fable: $2.75 * Opus 5.0: $2.03 * Opus 4.8: $1.80 * GPT 5.6 Sol: $1.04 * Kimi K3: $0.95 Looks like interest levels of cherry picked cost in their report. Cheaper model, clearly NOT. More expensive in both benchmarks.
  • spider-mario 2mo ago
    Your numbers are for “max”. Opus 5.0 “max” is $2.03. Opus 5.0 “high” (competitive with Claude 4.8 “max” on that index) is $1.06, less than the $1.80 you are quoting for 4.8 max. That the most expensive variant is expensive doesn’t really tell us much.
    • benjiro29 2mo ago
      Same answer i gave to somebody else up here... If you start to drop effort levels, you need to compare to the competition models. So GPT models on the same ~intelligence level, are then 50% cheaper. You see the issue? Its still a expensive model, and from my understanding, it still uses the old tokenizer. Going to be interesting to see when GPT 6 comes out (very soon).
      • novlrdotcom 2mo ago
        Just depends on your tier I guess. For someone like me who's on Max anyway, it's a free bonus.
      • spider-mario 2mo ago
        > If you start to drop effort levels, you need to compare to the competition models. Yes. I advocate for doing that. > So GPT models on the same ~intelligence level, are then 50% cheaper. How did you reach this conclusion? Opus 5 high ($1.06) has the same “intelligence index” as GPT 5.6 Sol max ($1.04). Opus 5 medium ($0.62) performs a bit below GPT 5.6 Sol xhigh ($0.68) but slightly above GPT 5.6 Sol high ($0.45).
• artursapek 2mo ago
  It's definitely not cheaper than Sonnet on my benchmark, but it's cheaper than Fable and outperforms it. Which is big IMO. https://revise.io/errata-bench https://revise.io/errata-bench