Claude Sonnet 5

The jump in reasoning quality is noticeable. What's interesting is how it handles ambiguous instructions now — it seems to ask fewer clarifying questions and just makes a reasonable judgment call. That's a double-edged sword depending on your use case.

Sonnet seems to be really expensive

Not looking great for an upcoming IPO

Anybody notice that they did not include Sonnet 5 Max in the "Agentic Search results", when comparing to Opus 4.8 ...

Based upon the "Agentic Computer usage", Sonnet 5 Max was going to be off "Agentic Search results" chart. lol ...

In short, Sonnet 5 Low/Medium is more cost efficient, if its a task below Opus 4.8 Medium. For the rest its expensive and your better off using Opus 4.8.

Why even release this model?

It does not pass the "I want to wash my car, should I drive or walk"

Ah that's why Opus has been so slow for the last couple of days.

So many things to think about regarding these "benchmarks":

- Do the ever increasing scores on the mean we will soon have models that approach 100%? And what would that even mean? That there is no more room for improvement?

- Would Anthropic (or any other model vendor for that matter) ever release a newer model that scores lower? If not, does that mean they keep tweaking a new model they want to release until it shows an improvement of the prior model?

- Would it be more useful to move toward a comparative rather than absolute ranking?

Have they ever said what the difference is between Sonnet and Opus? Are they trained differently? Different architectures? Is Sonnet a distillation? Is it just that Sonnet has less resources for inference?

None of the other labs are doing this kind of long lived two model series.

I run a proofreading benchmark that tests how well models can find and fix errors in English text. They get several passes in a simple agent loop. Sonnet 5 is definitely better than Sonnet 4.6, but inferior on both quality and cost to GLM 5.1, GLM 5.2, Gemini 3.1 Flash, and Gemini 3.1 Pro. https://revise.io/errata-bench

Finally a model release where everyone is realising the scam. The world is healing (maybe).

Important to note that the cost graphs are heavily distorted. The agentic serch one for example is divided into 3 'columns': $0-$2, $2-$5 and $5-$10.

And yet, the $2-$5 section is the widest, even though it only contains a single point.

I can't even say if this is making the product look better or not, but it sure is weird. Maybe Claude just hallucinated those splits xD

there was a vibecoded prediction market–style page that was put up yesterday (?) that got the date exactly right i think

Anyone else feel like Opus 4.8 got significantly dumber over the last 2 weeks?

GLM 5.2 is better and cheaper. Maybe they are trying to embarrass Trump by making it look like we are losing to China.

I don't pay so I'm glad for the upgrade. I usually use Gemini, Mistral Le Chat (Vibe...) or Deepseek as they have way more generous free limits and I can basically spam forever.

Is it just me or is there a huge difference between how much one can accomplish in a 5-hour window with GPT 5.5 on xhigh versus any Claude model?

American AI company status: We are now bragging about how bad our models are unironically.

Okay.

Too expensive?

Is this the default model for non-paying users? If so, that could be an interesting move in the competition for this segment.

The whole fable fiasco really soured me on Anthropic. This just looks disappointing by comparison.

In effective terms they're lowering prices.

So they repackaged Fable and added "don't scare the government" to the prompt

Fable soon please.

I feel like this is a bit of a disappointment. Sonnet 4 was a clear step above Opus 3.x, while this is a lot muddier.

Ok thats a one month clock to the next Opus model at least, so thats a silver lining to a meh model.

"Our new model is proudly dumber now!"

What is the point if it is one Trump's brain fart away from being blocked?

[flagged]

[dead]

[dead]

[dead]

AMAZING