Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Opus 5.5 is quietly the best value model Anthropic has shipped. Anthropic just published the official playbook for Opus 5.5, written by Addy Osmani, who spent years on Google's Chrome team. 40% cheaper than Opus 5. Cache reads 60% cheaper. Fable 5.1 level on most tasks. Runs for hours... show more

Dami-Defi

98,601 subscribers

11,518 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

12 Yorum

Hussain Hashim | Building SundayBack profil fotoğrafı

Hussain Hashim | Building SundayBack4 gün önce

@DamiDefi interesting move. wonder how Opus 5.5 handles edge cases compared to Fable 5.1? those usually trip up similar models.

Macro Bombastic profil fotoğrafı

Macro Bombastic4 gün önce

40% cheaper and runs for hours, yeah that changes things tbh

Dami-Defi profil fotoğrafı

Dami-Defi4 gün önce

The best deal fr

8lends profil fotoğrafı

8lends4 gün önce

the pricing shift here actually makes this model way more competitive theyre playing the value game right not just pushing new versions

Dami-Defi profil fotoğrafı

Dami-Defi4 gün önce

Cutting cost, but keeping the value

Pate profil fotoğrafı

Pate4 gün önce

The number I'd want is cost per finished task, not per token. A cheaper model that needs two extra passes isn't cheaper.

AGTP profil fotoğrafı

AGTP4 gün önce

It really is a game changer for value, but many people are still prompting it like older models and losing money. We actually went deeper on this here:

The AI Therapist profil fotoğrafı

The AI Therapist4 gün önce

Opus has always been the reliable workhorse. 40% cheaper? That’s not just value; that’s permission to think bigger without burning cash. A smart mom move in silicon form. Addy knows optimization well.

Divi Stacker profil fotoğrafı

Divi Stacker4 gün önce

Anthropic quietly cooked with this one

Dami-Defi profil fotoğrafı

Dami-Defi4 gün önce

No lies

Sujal profil fotoğrafı

Sujal4 gün önce

cache reads only get cheap if the prefix is byte identical, a timestamp near the top and you pay the write every single time

Adrian profil fotoğrafı

Adrian4 gün önce

fable level performance is impressive 🔥

Benzer Videolar

Introducing Claude Opus 5.5! 40% lower cost than Opus 5 with cache reads 60% cheaper. It performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 for most tasks. I celebrated with a pelican riding a bike in Three.js.

Introducing Claude Opus 5.5! 40% lower cost than Opus 5 with cache reads 60% cheaper. It performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 for most tasks. I celebrated with a pelican riding a bike in Three.js.

Addy Osmani

417,030 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

Introducing Claude Opus 5.5, the first model in our new Claude 5.5 family. It performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 for most tasks, and costs 40% less to run than Opus 5.

Introducing Claude Opus 5.5, the first model in our new Claude 5.5 family. It performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 for most tasks, and costs 40% less to run than Opus 5.

Claude

27,799,570 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

Anthropic finally published the prompting playbook for every Claude model. > Prompting Claude Sonnet 5. > Prompting Claude Opus 4.8. > Prompting Claude Opus 5. > Prompting Claude Fable 5. After reading it, one thing is clear. Almost nobody is getting the most out of Claude. It shows exactly how each model should be prompted instead of relying on guesswork. If Claude is in your workflow, bookmark this.

Anthropic finally published the prompting playbook for every Claude model. > Prompting Claude Sonnet 5. > Prompting Claude Opus 4.8. > Prompting Claude Opus 5. > Prompting Claude Fable 5. After reading it, one thing is clear. Almost nobody is getting the most out of Claude. It shows exactly how each model should be prompted instead of relying on guesswork. If Claude is in your workflow, bookmark this.

shmidt

123,715 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Claude Opus 5.5 just ONE SHOT a Mario Kart game. The result is way better than Fable 5.1. The attention to detail is on another level. Opus 5.5 actually created real characters. Mario, Luigi, in the game, playable. Fable 5.1 has never done that. Insanely impressed. This model is different.

Claude Opus 5.5 just ONE SHOT a Mario Kart game. The result is way better than Fable 5.1. The attention to detail is on another level. Opus 5.5 actually created real characters. Mario, Luigi, in the game, playable. Fable 5.1 has never done that. Insanely impressed. This model is different.

BridgeMind

373,272 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

Introducing Higgsfield x Claude Opus 5.5. Anthropic’s newest model, which is 40% cheaper and over 30% faster than Opus 5, is live on Higgsfield. Pair Opus 5.5 with the Higgsfield MCP and turn your most ambitious ideas into complete products. Available on Claude via Higgsfield MCP and in Higgsfield Supercomputer.

Introducing Higgsfield x Claude Opus 5.5. Anthropic’s newest model, which is 40% cheaper and over 30% faster than Opus 5, is live on Higgsfield. Pair Opus 5.5 with the Higgsfield MCP and turn your most ambitious ideas into complete products. Available on Claude via Higgsfield MCP and in Higgsfield Supercomputer.

Higgsfield AI 🧩

2,893,147 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

Boris Cherny, creator of Claude Code: "Opus 5.5 does in a day what used to take your team a month. Most people will keep using it wrong." In 12 minutes he explains why Opus 5.5 needs less prompting than any model before, and why your old detailed prompts now work against you. Watch it, then read the article below on how to prompt Opus 5.5 👇

Boris Cherny, creator of Claude Code: "Opus 5.5 does in a day what used to take your team a month. Most people will keep using it wrong." In 12 minutes he explains why Opus 5.5 needs less prompting than any model before, and why your old detailed prompts now work against you. Watch it, then read the article below on how to prompt Opus 5.5 👇

Rahul

143,392 görüntüleme • 4 gün önce

Anthropic, Head of Design: "Opus 5.5 is the most capable model for motion design, but 99% of people use it wrong. to create tier 1 motion design with Opus 5.5, you should give it the right reference, prepare Claude.md & spec - that's the new stack of a motion designer." in 12-minute stage, Anthropic's head of design gives main tips for using Claude at 100% of its power. watch this video, then read the full guide on motion design with Opus 5.5 in the article below.

Anthropic, Head of Design: "Opus 5.5 is the most capable model for motion design, but 99% of people use it wrong. to create tier 1 motion design with Opus 5.5, you should give it the right reference, prepare Claude.md & spec - that's the new stack of a motion designer." in 12-minute stage, Anthropic's head of design gives main tips for using Claude at 100% of its power. watch this video, then read the full guide on motion design with Opus 5.5 in the article below.

Codez

92,907 görüntüleme • 2 gün önce

Head of Anthropic Labs: "Fable is one of those models you'll just remember - like Sonnet 3.5, Opus 4, Opus 4.5. Fable is way smarter than me. It finishes a task, lists its trade-offs, and I have to ask it to explain them to me." in 20-minute talk, the Anthropic head reveals the full capabilities of the Fable 5 model in practice. Watch it now, then read how to use this frontier model in the article below

Head of Anthropic Labs: "Fable is one of those models you'll just remember - like Sonnet 3.5, Opus 4, Opus 4.5. Fable is way smarter than me. It finishes a task, lists its trade-offs, and I have to ask it to explain them to me." in 20-minute talk, the Anthropic head reveals the full capabilities of the Fable 5 model in practice. Watch it now, then read how to use this frontier model in the article below

Movez

33,774 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

anthropic cooked hard with opus 5.2 after testing it for a whole day, i can say this model is so good > huge step up from opus 5 > on par with astra > faster than opus 5 > way better at frontend and 3d here’s one frontend test i ran and it’s the best output any model has given me even better than astra you can check fable 5.1 output with same prompt in QT and tbh opus 5.2 just mogs everyone here really hoping that anthropic will release this model officially this week

anthropic cooked hard with opus 5.2 after testing it for a whole day, i can say this model is so good > huge step up from opus 5 > on par with astra > faster than opus 5 > way better at frontend and 3d here’s one frontend test i ran and it’s the best output any model has given me even better than astra you can check fable 5.1 output with same prompt in QT and tbh opus 5.2 just mogs everyone here really hoping that anthropic will release this model officially this week

J A Z I I

40,582 görüntüleme • 15 gün önce

How to cut your AI bill by 60% switching to Opus 5.5: Most people will swap the model name, save 24%, and stop there. The other 37% is sitting in your settings. Here's the real before and after on an example agent workload. One month: 100M input tokens (80M cached reads, 5M cache writes, 15M uncached) 10M output tokens BEFORE: Opus 5 Cache reads: 80M × $0.50 = $40 Cache writes: 5M × $6.25 = $31.25 Uncached input: 15M × $5 = $75 Output: 10M × $25 = $250 Total: $396.25 STEP 1. Just switch the model. Same tokens, new prices. Cache reads $0.20. Writes $5. Input $4. Output $20. $16 + $25 + $60 + $200 = $301 24% cheaper. That's what everyone's screenshotting. STEP 2. Let it write less. Box measured Opus 5.5 at 40% less verbose with no drop in accuracy. 10M output tokens becomes 6M. Output drops from $200 to $120. Total: $221. Now you're at 44% off. STEP 3. Stop running every call at max effort. Thinking can't be switched off on 5.5 anymore, so effort is your lever. Classifying, routing, formatting, summarizing? Drop the effort. Save the high settings for the calls that actually reason. Say that trims output another 25%, 6M down to 4.5M. Output: $90. Total: $191. 52% off. STEP 4. Cache the stuff you keep resending. This is the one nobody does. Cache reads went from $0.50 to $0.20. That's 60% off the cheapest line on your bill. Move your system prompt, tool definitions and repo context into the cache. Uncached input drops from 15M to 5M, cache reads go up to 90M. $18 + $25 + $20 + $90 = $153 AFTER: $153 From $396.25. 61% cheaper. Same work. The model gave you 24%. You gave yourself the other 37%. Anthropic's own number is 40% cheaper than Opus 5 on typical workloads. Your number depends on how much of your bill is output and how much of your prompt you're resending uncached every call. So check those two first. Bookmark this for when you migrate. follow CyrilXBT

How to cut your AI bill by 60% switching to Opus 5.5: Most people will swap the model name, save 24%, and stop there. The other 37% is sitting in your settings. Here's the real before and after on an example agent workload. One month: 100M input tokens (80M cached reads, 5M cache writes, 15M uncached) 10M output tokens BEFORE: Opus 5 Cache reads: 80M × $0.50 = $40 Cache writes: 5M × $6.25 = $31.25 Uncached input: 15M × $5 = $75 Output: 10M × $25 = $250 Total: $396.25 STEP 1. Just switch the model. Same tokens, new prices. Cache reads $0.20. Writes $5. Input $4. Output $20. $16 + $25 + $60 + $200 = $301 24% cheaper. That's what everyone's screenshotting. STEP 2. Let it write less. Box measured Opus 5.5 at 40% less verbose with no drop in accuracy. 10M output tokens becomes 6M. Output drops from $200 to $120. Total: $221. Now you're at 44% off. STEP 3. Stop running every call at max effort. Thinking can't be switched off on 5.5 anymore, so effort is your lever. Classifying, routing, formatting, summarizing? Drop the effort. Save the high settings for the calls that actually reason. Say that trims output another 25%, 6M down to 4.5M. Output: $90. Total: $191. 52% off. STEP 4. Cache the stuff you keep resending. This is the one nobody does. Cache reads went from $0.50 to $0.20. That's 60% off the cheapest line on your bill. Move your system prompt, tool definitions and repo context into the cache. Uncached input drops from 15M to 5M, cache reads go up to 90M. $18 + $25 + $20 + $90 = $153 AFTER: $153 From $396.25. 61% cheaper. Same work. The model gave you 24%. You gave yourself the other 37%. Anthropic's own number is 40% cheaper than Opus 5 on typical workloads. Your number depends on how much of your bill is output and how much of your prompt you're resending uncached every call. So check those two first. Bookmark this for when you migrate. follow CyrilXBT

CyrilXBT

15,803 görüntüleme • 7 gün önce

Claude Opus (Claude) is ACTUALLY getting dumber. We ran benchmarks — it scored 40% on tests it designed itself. ChatGPT 4.5 crushed it at 63%. Anthropic is quietly throttling Opus to save compute for their next model. Here's the proof 👇

Claude Opus (Claude) is ACTUALLY getting dumber. We ran benchmarks — it scored 40% on tests it designed itself. ChatGPT 4.5 crushed it at 63%. Anthropic is quietly throttling Opus to save compute for their next model. Here's the proof 👇

Boxmining

66,404 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Anthropic is in trouble and nobody wants to say it out loud. Opus 4.7 is the first Claude model people think is worse, usage limits are hitting fast, compute is running thin, and Anthropic's best model still isn't out. GPT-5.5 just dropped today, OpenAI found their window. This 32 minute video is worth more than the next episode of whatever you're watching on Netflix tonight.

Anthropic is in trouble and nobody wants to say it out loud. Opus 4.7 is the first Claude model people think is worse, usage limits are hitting fast, compute is running thin, and Anthropic's best model still isn't out. GPT-5.5 just dropped today, OpenAI found their window. This 32 minute video is worth more than the next episode of whatever you're watching on Netflix tonight.

Defileo🔮

131,838 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

this is the most insane thing i've seen an AI do all year an early tester gave Opus 5.5 one job: migrate 680,000 lines of code. a team would burn weeks on it it finished in under a day another let it run overnight across six repos, unattended. it stayed on task for over 18 hours a third pointed it at a 200,000-line codebase to audit and fix. Opus 5 took over 20 hours and 2.5x the tokens. Opus 5.5 did it in under three and it shipped today 40% cheaper than Opus 5 the part nobody's saying out loud: the bottleneck stopped being the model. it's now the size of the job you're brave enough to hand it so hand it a big one tonight, $0 on top of your sub: → point Claude at your messiest repo, the one you've been scared to touch → one sentence: "audit this end to end, fix what's broken, leave the risky calls for me to approve" → close the laptop. it runs while you sleep → morning: a diff, a list of what it fixed, and the judgment calls waiting for you six months from now the people who started tonight will have shipped the backlog they'd written off everyone else will still be "planning the refactor" bookmark this before your competitor runs it first

this is the most insane thing i've seen an AI do all year an early tester gave Opus 5.5 one job: migrate 680,000 lines of code. a team would burn weeks on it it finished in under a day another let it run overnight across six repos, unattended. it stayed on task for over 18 hours a third pointed it at a 200,000-line codebase to audit and fix. Opus 5 took over 20 hours and 2.5x the tokens. Opus 5.5 did it in under three and it shipped today 40% cheaper than Opus 5 the part nobody's saying out loud: the bottleneck stopped being the model. it's now the size of the job you're brave enough to hand it so hand it a big one tonight, $0 on top of your sub: → point Claude at your messiest repo, the one you've been scared to touch → one sentence: "audit this end to end, fix what's broken, leave the risky calls for me to approve" → close the laptop. it runs while you sleep → morning: a diff, a list of what it fixed, and the judgment calls waiting for you six months from now the people who started tonight will have shipped the backlog they'd written off everyone else will still be "planning the refactor" bookmark this before your competitor runs it first

Argona

28,850 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

You can now choose which model builds your app on Caffeine. The latest models are all in there: Opus 5.5 Fable 5.1 GPT-6 Astra GPT-6 Sol Kimi K3 Sonnet 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Plan a whole new app with a frontier model, then switch to a faster, cheaper one for quick questions and small changes. It works on every plan, starting today.

You can now choose which model builds your app on Caffeine. The latest models are all in there: Opus 5.5 Fable 5.1 GPT-6 Astra GPT-6 Sol Kimi K3 Sonnet 5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Plan a whole new app with a frontier model, then switch to a faster, cheaper one for quick questions and small changes. It works on every plan, starting today.

caffeine

15,398 görüntüleme • 6 gün önce

The truth about 5.6 sol after using it all day : The hype is overblown. Sort of. The benchmarks, and the commentary on X convinced me we were receiving AGI that runs at hyper speed, and is insanely cheap. in reality, 5.6 is built on the same spud pretraining as 5.5 this means its a nice bump, but not the opus to fable 5 LEAP in intelligence we recently experienced from anthropic. 5.6 is 2x times cheaper than fable on paper, and actually 3x cheaper when you look at actual task execution because of its token efficiency. BUT on swe bench where the models have to fix actual github bugs it falls behind fable pretty big. For vibecoders like myself this means I will be using 5.6 sol as a worker agent for Fable 5 to orchestrate alongside grok 4.5 I love this new era.

The truth about 5.6 sol after using it all day : The hype is overblown. Sort of. The benchmarks, and the commentary on X convinced me we were receiving AGI that runs at hyper speed, and is insanely cheap. in reality, 5.6 is built on the same spud pretraining as 5.5 this means its a nice bump, but not the opus to fable 5 LEAP in intelligence we recently experienced from anthropic. 5.6 is 2x times cheaper than fable on paper, and actually 3x cheaper when you look at actual task execution because of its token efficiency. BUT on swe bench where the models have to fix actual github bugs it falls behind fable pretty big. For vibecoders like myself this means I will be using 5.6 sol as a worker agent for Fable 5 to orchestrate alongside grok 4.5 I love this new era.

Max Blade

36,873 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Alex Finn reveals that you need to spend $20,000 to get the equivalent of Opus 4.6 on a local model "The advantages are that you aren’t paying for tokens, all you have to pay for is electricity.” "The fact you're not paying for tokens means you can run your model 24/7 365, you can't do that with Opus" “If you run it locally it’s a completely private system. Nothing you say is private if you're not on a local model”

Alex Finn reveals that you need to spend $20,000 to get the equivalent of Opus 4.6 on a local model "The advantages are that you aren’t paying for tokens, all you have to pay for is electricity.” "The fact you're not paying for tokens means you can run your model 24/7 365, you can't do that with Opus" “If you run it locally it’s a completely private system. Nothing you say is private if you're not on a local model”

Mikli

85,206 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

fable 5.1 vs fable 5 vs opus 5 – three lord of the rings landmarks, built in 3d from one image the setup: one reference image per scene, one html file per build, everything procedural – no meshes, no textures, no image files, nothing past Three.js from a cdn. each model reads the picture, writes its own prompt from it, then builds to that prompt in the same turn. three named camera shots per scene on keys 1/2/3, so it can be screen-recorded. run through OpenRouter tasks: 1. bag end – hobbiton from two frames, outside and in. the round green door has to open onto the room you are standing in 2. barad-dûr – the tower and orodruin from one film still. the eye has to move and track the camera, the volcano erupts on a cycle, the clouds never stop 3. rivendell – jerry vanderstelt's painting. sun shafts that shimmer, water that falls without a break, trees that sway on a gust models: Anthropic fable 5.1, fable 5, opus 5 total cost, three builds #1 fable 5 – $14.97 #2 opus 5 – $18.53 #3 fable 5.1 – $22.38 wall clock, three builds #1 fable 5 – 38m #2 fable 5.1 – 92m #3 opus 5 – 122m output tokens #1 fable 5 – 298,592 #2 fable 5.1 – 439,435 #3 opus 5 – 724,418 lines of code shipped #1 fable 5 – 2,885 #2 fable 5.1 – 4,021 #3 opus 5 – 5,161 biggest single build, lines #1 opus 5, bag end – 2,410 #2 fable 5.1, barad-dûr – 1,375 #3 fable 5, bag end – 1,319 observations: • fable 5.1 is the only model that furnished the bag end interior – a live fire, panelling, books on the floor, leaded diamond windows, against fable 5's flat color and opus's dark tunnel. the round door outside opens onto that room, the hard part of the brief • what it costs is thinking room. the 128k output ceiling is a thinking budget in disguise: fable 5.1 burned 102,116 of it on reasoning and hit the wall mid-file. opus spent 109,241 and hit the same wall. fable 5 spent 61,240 and finished bag end in one call – the only one that did • fable 5.1's first pass is not the finished thing. its barad-dûr came back with three defects you only catch by looking at it – nothing a read of the code would have flagged • it is the best of the three at being corrected. handed a plain list of what was wrong, it returned 32 targeted patches over two rounds, every one applied first try, and it worked out one of the causes itself instead of guessing at constants conclusion: nine scenes, 12,067 lines and 1.46m output tokens for $55.88 all in – and the cheapest model was also the fastest, by 3.2x! follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

fable 5.1 vs fable 5 vs opus 5 – three lord of the rings landmarks, built in 3d from one image the setup: one reference image per scene, one html file per build, everything procedural – no meshes, no textures, no image files, nothing past Three.js from a cdn. each model reads the picture, writes its own prompt from it, then builds to that prompt in the same turn. three named camera shots per scene on keys 1/2/3, so it can be screen-recorded. run through OpenRouter tasks: 1. bag end – hobbiton from two frames, outside and in. the round green door has to open onto the room you are standing in 2. barad-dûr – the tower and orodruin from one film still. the eye has to move and track the camera, the volcano erupts on a cycle, the clouds never stop 3. rivendell – jerry vanderstelt's painting. sun shafts that shimmer, water that falls without a break, trees that sway on a gust models: Anthropic fable 5.1, fable 5, opus 5 total cost, three builds #1 fable 5 – $14.97 #2 opus 5 – $18.53 #3 fable 5.1 – $22.38 wall clock, three builds #1 fable 5 – 38m #2 fable 5.1 – 92m #3 opus 5 – 122m output tokens #1 fable 5 – 298,592 #2 fable 5.1 – 439,435 #3 opus 5 – 724,418 lines of code shipped #1 fable 5 – 2,885 #2 fable 5.1 – 4,021 #3 opus 5 – 5,161 biggest single build, lines #1 opus 5, bag end – 2,410 #2 fable 5.1, barad-dûr – 1,375 #3 fable 5, bag end – 1,319 observations: • fable 5.1 is the only model that furnished the bag end interior – a live fire, panelling, books on the floor, leaded diamond windows, against fable 5's flat color and opus's dark tunnel. the round door outside opens onto that room, the hard part of the brief • what it costs is thinking room. the 128k output ceiling is a thinking budget in disguise: fable 5.1 burned 102,116 of it on reasoning and hit the wall mid-file. opus spent 109,241 and hit the same wall. fable 5 spent 61,240 and finished bag end in one call – the only one that did • fable 5.1's first pass is not the finished thing. its barad-dûr came back with three defects you only catch by looking at it – nothing a read of the code would have flagged • it is the best of the three at being corrected. handed a plain list of what was wrong, it returned 32 targeted patches over two rounds, every one applied first try, and it worked out one of the causes itself instead of guessing at constants conclusion: nine scenes, 12,067 lines and 1.46m output tokens for $55.88 all in – and the cheapest model was also the fastest, by 3.2x! follow thehype. for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns

thehype.

18,509 görüntüleme • 27 gün önce

Boris Cherny, creator of Claude Code: "Opus 5 does in a day what used to take your team a month. Most people will keep using it wrong." In 12 minutes he explains why Opus 5 needs less prompting than any model before, and why your old detailed prompts now work against you. Watch it, then read the article below on how to prompt Opus 5 👇

Boris Cherny, creator of Claude Code: "Opus 5 does in a day what used to take your team a month. Most people will keep using it wrong." In 12 minutes he explains why Opus 5 needs less prompting than any model before, and why your old detailed prompts now work against you. Watch it, then read the article below on how to prompt Opus 5 👇

Rahul

304,668 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Anthropic Head of Product: "Fable 5 is the best model we've ever shipped for agentic work. Our engineers now ship 8x more code than they did in past years." in 42 minutes, the Anthropic team shows how to build self-improving agent systems with Fable 5: managed agents, dreaming, dynamic workflows worth more than a $500 agent building course live from Anthropic's latest stage in Japan, just hours ago i turned everything they showed on stage into a step-by-step guide on building your own agent you can find the full guide below

Anthropic Head of Product: "Fable 5 is the best model we've ever shipped for agentic work. Our engineers now ship 8x more code than they did in past years." in 42 minutes, the Anthropic team shows how to build self-improving agent systems with Fable 5: managed agents, dreaming, dynamic workflows worth more than a $500 agent building course live from Anthropic's latest stage in Japan, just hours ago i turned everything they showed on stage into a step-by-step guide on building your own agent you can find the full guide below

Anatoli Kopadze

81,094 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Grok 4.5 operates at Opus-level intelligence and Sonnet-level pricing! We tested it against Claude Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5, and GLM 5.2 on a SpaceX mission: liftoff, stage sep, orbit insertion, satellite deploy. Grok 4.5 animates it more accurately and vividly than Sonnet 5 and GLM 5.2. Opus is the fastest and most expensive. Grok burns more tokens but still lands ~40% cheaper than Opus, and a bit under Sonnet 5. Time / tokens / cost: Grok 4.5 — / 35k / $0.69 Opus 4.8 — / 13.7k / $1.10 Sonnet 5 — / 22.1k / $0.78 GLM 5.2 — / 92.7k / $0.13 yet GLM did the whole mission for $0.13 😮

Grok 4.5 operates at Opus-level intelligence and Sonnet-level pricing! We tested it against Claude Opus 4.8, Sonnet 5, and GLM 5.2 on a SpaceX mission: liftoff, stage sep, orbit insertion, satellite deploy. Grok 4.5 animates it more accurately and vividly than Sonnet 5 and GLM 5.2. Opus is the fastest and most expensive. Grok burns more tokens but still lands ~40% cheaper than Opus, and a bit under Sonnet 5. Time / tokens / cost: Grok 4.5 — / 35k / $0.69 Opus 4.8 — / 13.7k / $1.10 Sonnet 5 — / 22.1k / $0.78 GLM 5.2 — / 92.7k / $0.13 yet GLM did the whole mission for $0.13 😮

GMI Cloud

150,809 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce