Claude Opus 4.7

Interesting to see the benchmark numbers, though at this point I find these incremental seeming updates hard to interpret into capability increases for me beyond just "it might be somewhat better".

Maybe I've skimmed too quickly and missed it, but does calling it 4.7 instead of 5 imply that it's the same as 4.6, just trained with further refined data/fine tuned to adapt the 4.6 weights to the new tokenizer etc?

Install the latest claude code to use opus 4.7:

`claude install latest`

So far most of what I'm noticing is different is a _lot_ more flat refusals to do something that Opus 4.6 + prior CC versions would have explored to see if they were possible.

as every AI provider is pushing news today, just wanted to say that apfel is v1.0.4 stable today https://github.com/Arthur-Ficial/apfel

Been on 10/15 hours a day sessions since january 31st. Last few days were horrendous. Thinking about dropping 20x.

The benchmarks of Opus 4.6 they compare to MUST be retaken the day of the new model release. If it was nerfed we need to know how much.

The most important question is: does it perform better than 4.6 in real world tasks? What's your experience?

OK 4.7 is a different animal altogether. - no longer a 10 year old autistic programming genius, but a confident programming genius basically taking the lead on what to do and truly putting you in your place. Slightly impatient but surprisingly confident, much more detailed in the tasks he does and double checks his work on the fly. - very little to no need to ask, have you rememebered to do this and that, its done. - also tells you which task he is doing next, rather than asking which task would you like him to do next - very different engagement with the user Surprisingly interesting, truly now leading the developer rather than guiding

Is this the first time a new Anthropic flagship model was announced and the comments section on HN was mostly negative?

Interesting that the MCP-Atlas score for 4.6 jumped to 75.8% compared to 59.5% https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-4-6

There's other small single digit differences, but I doubt that the benchmark is that unreliable...?

Is there a classic web interface? (noscript/basic (x)html)

Is Anthropic matching OpenAI's announcement schedule or is it the other way around? It's strange how it's so often the same day.

I've taken a two week hiatus on my personal projects, so I haven't experienced any of the issues that have been so widely reported recently with CC. I am eager to get back and see if experience these same issues.

Is it just Opus 4.6 with throttling removed?

With the new tokenizer did they A/B test this one?

I'm curious if that might be responsible for some of the regressions in the last month. I've been getting feedback requests on almost every session lately, but wasn't sure if that was because of the large amount of negative feedback online.

I am waiting for the 2x usage window to close to try it out today.

If they are charging 2x usage during the most important part of the day, doesn't this give OpenAI a slight advantage as people might naturally use Codex during this period?

Just before the end is this one-liner:

> the same input can map to more tokens—roughly 1.0–1.35× depending on the content type

Does this mean that we get a 35% price increase for a 5% efficiency gain? I'm not sure that's worth it.

Will they actually give you enough usage ? Biggest complaint is that codex offers way more weekly usage. Also this means GPT 5.5 release is imminent (I suspect thats what Elephant is on OR)

How powerful will Opus become before they decide to not release it publicly like Mythos?

Looks completely broken on AWS Bedrock

"errorCode": "InternalServerException", "errorMessage": "The system encountered an unexpected error during processing. Try your request again.",

Claude Code hasn't updated yet it seems, but I was able to test it using `claude --model claude-opus-4-7`

Or `/model claude-opus-4-7` from an existing session

edit: `/model claude-opus-4-7[1m]` to select the 1m context window version

I am honestly just happy they haven't figured out a way to lock in the users, and that there are alternatives that can get it done. I feel like they treat the user as a dumb peasant.

Opus 4.7 came even quicker than I expected. It's like they are releasing a new Opus to distract us from Mythos that we all really want.

Using it to build https://rustic-playground.app. Rust + Claude turned out to be a surprisingly good pairing — the compiler catches a whole class of AI slip-ups before they ever run. So far so good!

> "We are releasing Opus 4.7 with safeguards that automatically detect and block requests that indicate prohibited or high-risk cybersecurity uses. "

They're really investing heavily into this image that their newest models will be the death knell of all cybersecurity huh?

The marketing and sensationalism is getting so boring to listen to

Seems they jumped the gun releasing this without a claude code update?

     /model claude-opus-4.7
      ⎿  Model 'claude-opus-4.7' not found

Crazy how popular this post is on HN, are this many people actually using expensive paid models? Is everyone on HN a millionaire? Or is someone botting all anthropic posts?

What a joke Opus 4.7 at max is.

I gave it an agentic software project to critically review.

It claimed gemini-3.1-pro-preview is wrong model name, the current is 2.5. I said it's a claim not verified.

It offered to create a memory. I said it should have a better procedure, to avoid poisoning the process with unverified claims, since memories will most likely be ignored by it.

It agreed. It said it doesn't have another procedure, and it then discovered three more poisonous items in the critical review.

I said that this is a fabrication defect, it should not have been in production at all as a model.

It agreed, it said it can help but I would need to verify its work. I said it's footing me with the bill and the audit.

We amicably parted ways.

I would have accepted a caveman-style vocabulary but not a lobotomized model.

I'm looking forward to LobotoClaw. Not really.

Recently, Anthropic has been making bad decisions after bad decisions.

7 trivial prompts, and at 100% limit, using sonnet, not Opus this morning. Basically everyone at our company reporting the same use pattern. Support agent refuses to connect me to a human and terminated the conversation, I can't even get any other support because when I click "get help" (in Claude Desktop) it just takes me back to the agent and that conversation where fin refuses to respond any more.

And then on my personal account I had $150 in credits yesterday. This morning it is at $100, and no, I didn't use my personal account, just $50 gone.

Commenting here because this appears to be the only place that Anthropic responds. Sorry to the bored readers, but this is just terrible service.

Tried it, after about 10 messages, Opus 4.7 ceased to be able to recall conversation beyond the initial 10 messages. Super weird.

Based on last few attemts on claude code to address a docker build issue this feels like a downgrade

if Opus 4.7 or Mythos are so good how come Claude has some of the worst uptime in most online services?

Interesting that despite Anthropic billing it at the same rate as Opus 4.6, GitHub CoPilot bills it at 7.5x rather than 3x.

So they nixed the fun part of working with the bot - reading its thinking output. Now this thing just plain unfun and often stupid.

So, yeah, good job anthropic. Big fuck you to you too.

Seems like it's not in Claude Code natively yet, but you can do an explicit `/model claude-opus-4-7` and it works.

Claude Code doesn't seem to have updated yet, but I was able to try it out by running `claude --model claude-opus-4-7`

Training window cutoff is Jan 2026, when Opus 4.6 was Aug 2025. That quite a lot of new world knowledge.

Qwen 3.6 OSS and now this, almost feels like Anthropic rushed a release to steal hype away from Qwen

hmmm 20x Max plan on 2.1.111 `Claude Opus is not available with the Claude Pro plan. If you have updated your subscription plan recently, run /logout and /login for the plan to take effect.`

I happy with my GLM 5.1 and MiniMax 2.7 subscription and my wallet is happy, too.

I am glad Anthropic is pushing the limits, that means cheap Chinese models will have reasons to get better, too.

someone tell me if i should be happy

I've been using 4.6 in a long-term development project every day for weeks.

4.7 is a clusterf--k and train wreck.

Am I going to have to make it rewrite all the stuff 4.6 did?

Excited to use 1 prompt and have my whole 5-hour window at 100%. They can keep releasing new ones but if they don't solve their whole token shrinkage and gaslighting it is not gonna be interesting to se.