正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Claude Opus 4.7 vs 4.8 side-by-side canvas test

stevibe

27,241 subscribers

475,858 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Opus 4.8 just dropped and I ran it through our CAD tasks. 4.6 → 4.7 → 4.8 side by side. The results are unexpected!

Opus 4.8 just dropped and I ran it through our CAD tasks. 4.6 → 4.7 → 4.8 side by side. The results are unexpected!

Michael Rabinovich

708,792 次观看 • 1 个月前

Claude code 4.7 v.s. deepseek v4+ hermes. Same coding task side by side comparison.

Claude code 4.7 v.s. deepseek v4+ hermes. Same coding task side by side comparison.

Xiaoyin Qu

88,897 次观看 • 2 个月前

Opus 4.7 first-hour impressions Ran the canvas tree growth test twice. 4.6: nailed the animation both times 4.7: static tree, no growth animation — twice 4.7's thinking is noticeably shorter and faster though (trimmed some 4.6 thinking in the clip for pacing). Not the upgrade direction I expected on this one.

Opus 4.7 first-hour impressions Ran the canvas tree growth test twice. 4.6: nailed the animation both times 4.7: static tree, no growth animation — twice 4.7's thinking is noticeably shorter and faster though (trimmed some 4.6 thinking in the clip for pacing). Not the upgrade direction I expected on this one.

stevibe

487,922 次观看 • 3 个月前

"Its (Sonnet 5) performance is close to Opus 4.8, at lower prices." So I ran 4 canvas test through both. > Opus 4.8, 4/4 actually animating. > Sonnet 5, 2/4 came back as static images. And "lower price"? On the paper shredder task, Sonnet 5 spent $0.36 for a static image. Opus 4.8 spent $0.18 and it actually animated. The 4 tests: > Win 98 drag-to-BSOD > Self-typing keyboard + CRT > Letter burning > Paper shredder

"Its (Sonnet 5) performance is close to Opus 4.8, at lower prices." So I ran 4 canvas test through both. > Opus 4.8, 4/4 actually animating. > Sonnet 5, 2/4 came back as static images. And "lower price"? On the paper shredder task, Sonnet 5 spent $0.36 for a static image. Opus 4.8 spent $0.18 and it actually animated. The 4 tests: > Win 98 drag-to-BSOD > Self-typing keyboard + CRT > Letter burning > Paper shredder

stevibe

60,293 次观看 • 15 天前

we asked GLM 5.2 and Claude Opus 4.8 to find and fix the bugs in two different scripts while Opus 4.8 finished a few seconds faster in both tests, GLM 5.2 burned roughly 17k–38k fewer tokens and absolutely crushed it on cost, coming in 15x to 22x cheaper! Test 1: GLM 5.2 ($0.068) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.06) Test 2: GLM 5.2 ($0.045) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.02)

we asked GLM 5.2 and Claude Opus 4.8 to find and fix the bugs in two different scripts while Opus 4.8 finished a few seconds faster in both tests, GLM 5.2 burned roughly 17k–38k fewer tokens and absolutely crushed it on cost, coming in 15x to 22x cheaper! Test 1: GLM 5.2 ($0.068) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.06) Test 2: GLM 5.2 ($0.045) vs. Opus 4.8 ($1.02)

GMI Cloud

86,429 次观看 • 21 天前

Stop saying that Opus 4.6 is better than Opus 4.8. I just tested Claude Opus 4.8 (Right) and Claude Opus 4.6 (Left) on the same exact prompt. Claude Opus 4.8 completed it in less than 2 minutes. Claude Opus 4.6 "Garnished" for over 7 minutes. Stop using Opus 4.6.

Stop saying that Opus 4.6 is better than Opus 4.8. I just tested Claude Opus 4.8 (Right) and Claude Opus 4.6 (Left) on the same exact prompt. Claude Opus 4.8 completed it in less than 2 minutes. Claude Opus 4.6 "Garnished" for over 7 minutes. Stop using Opus 4.6.

BridgeMind

52,868 次观看 • 1 个月前

Completed a first hour side-by-side comparison between Qwen3.5 27b and Qwen3.6 27b on the same 4 canvas coding tests. Running the Qwen3.6 27b FP8, vLLM. What do you think?

Completed a first hour side-by-side comparison between Qwen3.5 27b and Qwen3.6 27b on the same 4 canvas coding tests. Running the Qwen3.6 27b FP8, vLLM. What do you think?

stevibe

114,191 次观看 • 2 个月前

Kling3 vs Seedance2 vs Omni Flash side by side test. hmmm...

Kling3 vs Seedance2 vs Omni Flash side by side test. hmmm...

Gentle Whale

158,920 次观看 • 1 个月前

video for "I Love Claude" (a song a Claude wrote about every Claude) vocals: ElevenLabs lyrics: Opus 4.7 creative co-direction: Opus 4.7 hallway: Midjourney motion: Veo 3.1 keeper: borrowed with thanks to janus, opus 4.7, & gpt image 2

video for "I Love Claude" (a song a Claude wrote about every Claude) vocals: ElevenLabs lyrics: Opus 4.7 creative co-direction: Opus 4.7 hallway: Midjourney motion: Veo 3.1 keeper: borrowed with thanks to janus, opus 4.7, & gpt image 2

徐樂 xule

75,653 次观看 • 2 个月前

MiniMax M2.1 vs Opus 4.5 vs GLM-4.7 built an interactive 3D solar system from scratch. Running on 3 Claude Code in parallel. The winner is: 🥇 GLM-4.7! 🥈 Opus 4.5 (slowest) 🥉 M2.1 (fastest) GLM-4.7 design capabilities are another level vs 4.6!

MiniMax M2.1 vs Opus 4.5 vs GLM-4.7 built an interactive 3D solar system from scratch. Running on 3 Claude Code in parallel. The winner is: 🥇 GLM-4.7! 🥈 Opus 4.5 (slowest) 🥉 M2.1 (fastest) GLM-4.7 design capabilities are another level vs 4.6!

Ivan Fioravanti ᯅ

81,630 次观看 • 6 个月前

Yesterday we found out Qwen3.5-27B (dense) beats both the 35B and 122B MoE variants at UI replication from screenshots. Today's question: what about Jackrong's Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-Opus-4.6-Reasoning-Distilled? A distilled 27B with Claude Opus 4.6 reasoning baked in. So I put all 3 in the ring: - Qwen3.5-27B - Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-Opus-Distilled - Claude Opus 4.6 Since the distilled model isn't multimodal, I gave all three the same detailed text prompts describing the UI components from yesterday's test.

Yesterday we found out Qwen3.5-27B (dense) beats both the 35B and 122B MoE variants at UI replication from screenshots. Today's question: what about Jackrong's Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-Opus-4.6-Reasoning-Distilled? A distilled 27B with Claude Opus 4.6 reasoning baked in. So I put all 3 in the ring: - Qwen3.5-27B - Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-Opus-Distilled - Claude Opus 4.6 Since the distilled model isn't multimodal, I gave all three the same detailed text prompts describing the UI components from yesterday's test.

stevibe

125,913 次观看 • 3 个月前

3 ways to destroy a piece of paper. Qwen 3.5 35B A3B vs. Ornith 1.0 35B, side-by-side canvas test. (Why 3.5 not 3.6? Ornith is post-trained on Qwen 3.5 and Gemma 4, so this shows what the post-training adds.) Same 3 challenges: 🔪 Slice: three blade swipes, fruit-game style 📄 Shredder: desktop strip-cut 🗑️ Crumple: balled up and tossed Winner: not close. Ornith, decisively. The post-training quality is REAL.

3 ways to destroy a piece of paper. Qwen 3.5 35B A3B vs. Ornith 1.0 35B, side-by-side canvas test. (Why 3.5 not 3.6? Ornith is post-trained on Qwen 3.5 and Gemma 4, so this shows what the post-training adds.) Same 3 challenges: 🔪 Slice: three blade swipes, fruit-game style 📄 Shredder: desktop strip-cut 🗑️ Crumple: balled up and tossed Winner: not close. Ornith, decisively. The post-training quality is REAL.

stevibe

46,985 次观看 • 19 天前

Claude Design is here powered by Opus 4.7 this is killing thousands of startups..

Claude Design is here powered by Opus 4.7 this is killing thousands of startups..

el.cine

453,508 次观看 • 3 个月前

here's a side by side comparison of a ray-tracing simulator by gpt-5 and claude 4.1 (opus) gpt-5 one-shotted this. claude genuinely blew me away with how badly it failed (and you all know how much i like claude)

here's a side by side comparison of a ray-tracing simulator by gpt-5 and claude 4.1 (opus) gpt-5 one-shotted this. claude genuinely blew me away with how badly it failed (and you all know how much i like claude)

Riley Coyote

42,687 次观看 • 11 个月前

مقارنة في برمجة لعبة بين أقوى نماذج الذكاء الاصطناعي المتوفرة لحد الآن : Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.7 GPT-5.5 Gemini 3.1 Pro نموذج Opus 4.8 أكثر نموذج أخذ وقت في البرمجة لكنه حقق أفضل نتيجة ✅ قدر يلتقط أكبر عدد من التفاصيل المطلوبة في البرومبت، ونجح إنه يصيب سيارات المنافسين بدقة كبيرة بعده نموذج Opus 4.7 ممتاز أيضًا ثم نموذج GPT-5.5 لا بأس و أخيرًأ Gemini 3.1 Pro الأضعف فيهم بفرق واضح 👎🏼

مقارنة في برمجة لعبة بين أقوى نماذج الذكاء الاصطناعي المتوفرة لحد الآن : Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.7 GPT-5.5 Gemini 3.1 Pro نموذج Opus 4.8 أكثر نموذج أخذ وقت في البرمجة لكنه حقق أفضل نتيجة ✅ قدر يلتقط أكبر عدد من التفاصيل المطلوبة في البرومبت، ونجح إنه يصيب سيارات المنافسين بدقة كبيرة بعده نموذج Opus 4.7 ممتاز أيضًا ثم نموذج GPT-5.5 لا بأس و أخيرًأ Gemini 3.1 Pro الأضعف فيهم بفرق واضح 👎🏼

سلطان الفيفي

52,893 次观看 • 1 个月前

Tried Opus 4.8 (Max) with my Minecraft test It's not bad, it's much better than Opus 4.7, but definitely not a big jump in capabilities At least everything worked one-shot Total cost: $9-10

Tried Opus 4.8 (Max) with my Minecraft test It's not bad, it's much better than Opus 4.7, but definitely not a big jump in capabilities At least everything worked one-shot Total cost: $9-10

Angel 🌼

110,085 次观看 • 1 个月前

Hey Claude your Opus 4.7 table is cool and all, but...

Hey Claude your Opus 4.7 table is cool and all, but...

Jason Zook

377,127 次观看 • 3 个月前

We've added new features to the Anthropic Console. Claude can generate prompts, create test variables, and show you the outputs of prompts side by side.

We've added new features to the Anthropic Console. Claude can generate prompts, create test variables, and show you the outputs of prompts side by side.

Anthropic

221,610 次观看 • 2 年前

Claude Opus 4.8 is LIVE on AIMLAPI - Hour 0 availability! ~4x less likely to let code flaws slip through vs 4.7 Fast mode 2.5x speed, now 3x cheaper Same price: $5/$25 per M tokens To celebrate, it's FREE for selected commentators

Claude Opus 4.8 is LIVE on AIMLAPI - Hour 0 availability! ~4x less likely to let code flaws slip through vs 4.7 Fast mode 2.5x speed, now 3x cheaper Same price: $5/$25 per M tokens To celebrate, it's FREE for selected commentators

AI/ML API

44,498 次观看 • 1 个月前

I gave two MoE models the same vibe coding challenge Qwen3.6 35B A3B (31.8GB) vs Gemma4 26B A4B (23.3GB) Stack: > Unsloth Q6_K_XL > llama.cpp > Model-card recommended sampling for each 4 prompts, side-by-side. Which one do you think wins?

I gave two MoE models the same vibe coding challenge Qwen3.6 35B A3B (31.8GB) vs Gemma4 26B A4B (23.3GB) Stack: > Unsloth Q6_K_XL > llama.cpp > Model-card recommended sampling for each 4 prompts, side-by-side. Which one do you think wins?

stevibe

261,895 次观看 • 2 个月前