3 ms·

There was a recent article[0] trending on HN a about their revenue numbers, split by B2C vs B2B. Based on it, it seems like Anthropic is 60% of OpenAI API-reve

There was a recent article[0] trending on HN a about their revenue numbers, split by B2C vs B2B. Based on it, it seems like Anthropic is 60% of OpenAI API-revenue wise, but just 4% B2C-revenue wise. Though I expect this is partly because the Claude web UI makes 3.5 available for free, and there's not that much reason to upgrade if you're not using it frequently. [0]: https://www.tanayj.com/p/openai-and-anthropic-revenue-breakdown https://www.tanayj.com/p/openai-and-anthropic-revenue-breakd...

famouswaffles 2y ago
3.5 is rate limited free, same as 4o (4o's limits are actually more generous). I think the real reason is much simpler - Claude/Anthropic has basically no awareness in the general public compared to Open AI. The chatGPT site had over 3B visits last month (#11 in Worldwide Traffic). Gemini and Character AI get a few hundred million but Claude doesn't even register in comparison. [0] Last they reported, OpenAI said they had 200M weekly active users.[1] Anthropic doesn't have anything approaching that. [0] https://www.similarweb.com/blog/insights/ai-news/chatgpt-topped-3-billion-visits-in-september/ https://www.similarweb.com/blog/insights/ai-news/chatgpt-top... [1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/openai-says-chatgpts-weekly-users-have-grown-200-million-2024-08-29/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/o...
- Eisenstein 2y ago
  They also had a very limited roll-out at first. Until somewhat recently Canada and Europe were excluded from the list of places they allowed sign-ups from.
- rafaelmn 2y ago
  I basically have to tell most of my coworkers to stop using GPT and switch to Claude for coding - Sonnet 3.5 is the first model that I feel isn't wasting my time.
pradn 2y ago
I suppose business customers are savvy and will do enough research to find the best cost-performance LLM. Whereas consumers are more brand and habit oriented. I do find myself running into Claude limits with moderate use. It's been so helpful, saving me hours of debugging some errors w/ OSS products. Totally worth $20/mo.

famouswaffles 2y ago

3.5 is rate limited free, same as 4o (4o's limits are actually more generous). I think the real reason is much simpler - Claude/Anthropic has basically no awareness in the general public compared to Open AI. The chatGPT site had over 3B visits last month (#11 in Worldwide Traffic). Gemini and Character AI get a few hundred million but Claude doesn't even register in comparison. [0] Last they reported, OpenAI said they had 200M weekly active users.[1] Anthropic doesn't have anything approaching that. [0] https://www.similarweb.com/blog/insights/ai-news/chatgpt-topped-3-billion-visits-in-september/ https://www.similarweb.com/blog/insights/ai-news/chatgpt-top... [1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/openai-says-chatgpts-weekly-users-have-grown-200-million-2024-08-29/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/o...

Eisenstein 2y ago
They also had a very limited roll-out at first. Until somewhat recently Canada and Europe were excluded from the list of places they allowed sign-ups from.
rafaelmn 2y ago
I basically have to tell most of my coworkers to stop using GPT and switch to Claude for coding - Sonnet 3.5 is the first model that I feel isn't wasting my time.

pradn 2y ago

I suppose business customers are savvy and will do enough research to find the best cost-performance LLM. Whereas consumers are more brand and habit oriented. I do find myself running into Claude limits with moderate use. It's been so helpful, saving me hours of debugging some errors w/ OSS products. Totally worth $20/mo.