Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🚨 Muse Wonder VS Claude Opus 5.5 meta claims Muse Wonder outperforms models like Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1, so i decided to put that claim to the test. i gave Muse Wonder and Opus 5.5 the exact same prompt: build an animated Popeye website from scratch. and here...

51,843 görüntüleme • 19 saat önce •via X (Twitter)

22 Yorum

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h18 saat önce

overall, I think i'd still settle for claude Opus 5.5. it performed much better imo. but muse wonder also did try, spend like $10 building the website in one shot.

Knowix profil fotoğrafı
Knowix17 saat önce

Meta might have actually released a model that is at least worthy of competing with these frontier models It did a very good job here, with little to no difference except the fact that the work is looking quite cluttered and bare

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h17 saat önce

yeah it still performed fairly compared with other demos that have been seeing on the TL. but they really next to up the game, plus it’s expensive. It spent $10 building the website above and opus spend way less with better results.

Zifan (Sail) Wang profil fotoğrafı
Zifan (Sail) Wang15 saat önce

Claude one is so claudish 😓 it just feels like watermarked

Nexx profil fotoğrafı
Nexx16 saat önce

muse really tried here

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h15 saat önce

yeah it did performed better than other demos I’ve seen

orvian profil fotoğrafı
orvian17 saat önce

muse cooked, i won’t lie

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h16 saat önce

yeah a bit better than most demos on the tl right now

Haleemah profil fotoğrafı
Haleemah16 saat önce

do you mind sharing prompt?

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h16 saat önce

i'd dm you with the prompt

Haleemah profil fotoğrafı
Haleemah16 saat önce

Tyyy

kepo profil fotoğrafı
kepo15 saat önce

in my opinion Muse Wonder very underrated imo

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h14 saat önce

i don't know man, is it really

Pranjal Gupta profil fotoğrafı
Pranjal Gupta14 saat önce

Same prompt, both models is the right test. Did you run it more than once? Single runs flatter whoever got lucky.

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h14 saat önce

i'd do more test but not run the same prompt again

Asmir profil fotoğrafı
Asmir16 saat önce

opus wrote an actual joke about them refusing to look at the camera, muse just says "approved by". the one with personality wins the homepage before any animation

Nawazish Khan profil fotoğrafı
Nawazish Khan15 saat önce

Claude

m0h profil fotoğrafı
m0h14 saat önce

that's what i think too

Gem profil fotoğrafı
Gem14 saat önce

What's that art style for the girl? It looks nice

JNK #State51 🇻🇪/🇺🇲 profil fotoğrafı
JNK #State51 🇻🇪/🇺🇲15 saat önce

Como puedo probar muse, siguen regalando tokens? @grok

Ninja profil fotoğrafı
Ninja14 saat önce

Tbh but I don't feel any difference in this scenario

Ahmad Alam profil fotoğrafı
Ahmad Alam15 saat önce

opus 5.5 is the beast rn

Benzer Videolar

Official Anthropic tip for Claude Code: stop burning Opus 5.5 on work Sonnet 5.5 can do, while Fable 5.1 sits idle hand the grunt work to Sonnet 5.5 subagents and put Fable 5.1 on call run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 plans and merges Sonnet 5.5 subagents read, edit and run the tests Fable 5.1 reads the full session and only speaks up at three points: → before a plan: is this the right approach? → when the same error comes back: am I digging in the wrong place? → before "done": what did I miss? Sonnet 5.5 builds. Fable 5.1 reviews. Opus 5.5 ships Jev engineering is the same move one layer down: the forks that need no thinker (which file, which tool, retry or stop) go to Jev in under half a second, and the big models only see the ones that split - the full tree > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > explorer reads the code on Sonnet 5.5 > worker edits and runs tests on Sonnet 5.5 > researcher pulls the docs on Sonnet 5.5 > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call for main and every subagent paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Check ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already fit explorer, worker and researcher. > Draft new ones only for missing roles > Give each model: sonnet, effort: medium > Skip any that pin a different model and list them 2. Set the main session to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable 3. Find anything that keeps the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, change nothing 4. Add one rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳

delost

44,001 görüntüleme • 11 gün önce

This is f*cking insane. This Claude Code tip saved me thousands of dollars. once Opus 5.5 is your main model, stop burning it on work Sonnet 5.5 can do, while Fable 5.1 sits idle hand the grunt work to Sonnet 5.5 subagents and put Fable 5.1 on call run /advisor fable Opus 5.5 plans and ships the final code Sonnet 5.5 subagents read, edit and run the tests Fable 5.1 reads the full session, every tool call included, and only speaks up at three points: → before a plan: is this the right approach? → when the same error comes back: am I digging in the wrong place? → before "done": what did I miss? Sonnet 5.5 builds. Fable 5.1 reviews. Opus 5.5 ships Jev engineering is the same move one layer down: the forks that need no thinker (which file, which tool, retry or stop) go to Jev in under half a second, and the big models only see the ones that split anyone still running one model for everything is paying Opus prices to decide whether a file exists - the full tree > Opus 5.5 on high runs the main session > explorer reads the code on Sonnet 5.5 > worker edits and runs tests on Sonnet 5.5 > researcher pulls the docs on Sonnet 5.5 > all three on medium > Fable 5.1 on call for main and every subagent paste the tree and this prompt into Claude Code ↓ "Rebuild my Claude Code setup around this tree: 1. Check ~/.claude/agents and .claude/agents for subagents that already fit explorer, worker and researcher. > Draft new ones only for missing roles > Give each model: sonnet, effort: medium > Skip any that pin a different model and list them 2. Set the main session to high via effortLevel in ~/.claude/settings.json, and set advisorModel to fable 3. Find anything that keeps the advisor off (CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADVISOR_TOOL, DISABLE_TELEMETRY) plus CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL, which overrides subagent effort. Report them, change nothing 4. Add one rule to ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md: consult the advisor before a large plan, when an error repeats, and before calling a long task done Show me every change as a diff first. No edits until I say go." ↳

delost

48,494 görüntüleme • 10 gün önce