5 ms·

Qwen team, please please please, release something to outperform and surpass the coding abilities of Opus 4.5. Although I like the model, I don't like the lead

Qwen team, please please please, release something to outperform and surpass the coding abilities of Opus 4.5. Although I like the model, I don't like the leadership of that company and how close it is, how divisive they're in terms of politics.

amrrs 9mo ago
Have you tried the new GLM 4.7?
- throwaw12 9mo ago
  yes I did, not on par with Opus 4.5. I use Opus 4.5 for planning, when I reach my usage limits fallback to GLM 4.7 only for implementing the plan, it still struggles, even though I configure GLM 4.7 as both smaller model and heavier model in claude code
- davely 9mo ago
  I've been using GLM 4.7 alongside Opus 4.5 and I can't believe how bad it is. Seriously. I spent 20 minutes yesterday trying to get GLM 4.7 to understand that a simple modal on a web page (vanilla JS and HTML!) wasn't displaying when a certain button was clicked. I hooked it up to Chrome MCP in Open Code as well. It constantly told me that it fixed the problem. In frustration, I opened Claude Code and just typed "Why won't the button with ID 'edit' work???!" It fixed the problem in one shot. This isn't even a hard problem (and I could have just fixed it myself but I guess sunk cost fallacy).
  - bityard 9mo ago
    I've used a bunch of the SOTA models (via my work's Windsurf subscription) for HTML/CSS/JS stuff over the past few months. Mind you, I am not a web developer, these are just internal and personal projects. My experience is that all of the models seem to do a decent job of writing a whole application from scratch, up to a certain point of complexity. But as soon as you ask them for non-trivial modifications and bugfixes, they _usually_ go deep into rationalized rabbit holes into nowhere. I burned through a lot of credits to try them all and Gemini tended to work the best for the things I was doing. But as always, YMMV.
    - KolmogorovComp 9mo ago
      Exactly the same feedback
  - Balinares 9mo ago
    Amazingly, just yesterday, I had Opus 4.5 crap itself extensively on a fairly simple problem -- it was trying to override a column with an aggregation function while also using it in a group-by without referring to the original column by its full qualified name prefixed with the table -- and in typical Claude fashion it assembled an entire abstraction layer to try and hide the problem under, before finally giving up, deleting the column, and smugly informing me I didn't need it anyway. That evening, for kicks, I brought the problem to GLM 4.7 Flash (Flash!) and it one-shot the right solution. It's not apples to apples, because when it comes down to it LLMs are statistical token extruders, and it's a lot easier to extrude the likely tokens from an isolated query than from a whole workspace that's already been messed up somewhat by said LLM. That, and data is not the plural of anecdote. But still, I'm easily amused, and this amused me. (I haven't otherwise pushed GLM 4.7 much and I don't have a strong opinion about about it.) But seriously, given the consistent pattern of knitting ever larger carpets to sweep errors under that Claude seems to exhibit over and over instead of identifying and addressing root causes, I'm curious what the codebases of people who use it a lot look like.
  - girvo 9mo ago
    > I can't believe how bad it is This has been my consistent experience with every model prior to Opus 4.5, and every single open model I've given a go. Hopefully we will get there in another 6 months when Opus is distilled into new open models, but I've always been shocked at some of the claims around open models, when I've been entirely unable to replicate them. Hell, even Opus 4.5 shits the bed with semi-regularity on anything that's not completely greenfield for my usage, once I'm giving it tasks beyond some unseen complexity boundary.
sampton 9mo ago
Every time Dario opens his mouth it's something weird.
TylerLives 9mo ago
>how divisive they're in terms of politics What do you mean by this?
- throwaw12 9mo ago
  Dario said not nice words about China and open models in general: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-20/anthropic-ceo-says-selling-advanced-ai-chips-to-china-is-crazy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-20/anthropic...
  - vlovich123 9mo ago
    I think the least politically divisive issue within the US is concern about China’s growth as it directly threatens the US’s ability to set the world’s agenda. It may be politically divisive if you are aligned with Chinese interests but I don’t see anything politically divisive for a US audience. I expect Chinese CEOs speak in similar terms to a Chinese audience in terms of making sure they’re decoupled from the now unstable US political machine.
    - cmrdporcupine 9mo ago
      "... for a US audience" And that's the rub. Many of us are not.
    - subscribed 9mo ago
      Looking at the last year's US agenda I'm okay with that.
  - Levitz 9mo ago
    I mean, there's no way it's about this right? Being critical of favorable actions towards a rival country shouldn't be divisive, and if it is, well, I don't think the problem is in the criticism. Also the link doesn't mention open source? From a google search, he doesn't seem to care much for it.
  - giancarlostoro 9mo ago
mortsnort 9mo ago
They were just waiting for someone in the comments to ask!
- mhuffman 9mo ago
  It really is the best way to incentivize politeness!
- stuckkeys 9mo ago
  I loled hard at this. Thank you kind stranger.
- zeppelin101 9mo ago
  Someone has to take the first step. Let's be grateful to the brave anon HN poster for stepping up.
WarmWash 9mo ago
The Chinese labs distill the SOTA models to boost the performance of theirs. They are a trailer hooked up (with a 3-6 month long chain) to the trucks pushing the technology forwards. I've yet to see a trailer overtake it's truck. China would need an architectural breakthrough to leap American labs given the huge compute disparity.
- aaa_aaa 9mo ago
  No all they need is time. I am awaiting the dowfall of the ai hegemony and hype with popcorn at hand.
- mhuffman 9mo ago
  I would be happy with an openweight 3 month old Claude
  - cmrdporcupine 9mo ago
    DeepSeek 3.2 is frankly fairly close to that. GLM 4.7 as well. They're basically around Sonnet 4 level.
- miklosz 9mo ago
  I have seen indeed a trailer overtake its truck. Not a beautiful view.
  - digdugdirk 9mo ago
    Agreed. I do think the metaphor still holds though. A financial jackknifing of the AI industry seems to be one very plausible outcome as these promises/expectations of the AI companies starts meeting reality.
- overfeed 9mo ago
  Care to explain how the volume of AI research papers authored by Chinese researchers[1] has exceeded US-published ones? Time-traveling plagiarism perhaps, since you believe the US is destined to lead always. 1. Chinese researcher in China, to be more specific.
Onavo 9mo ago
Well DeepSeek V4 is rumored to be in that range and will be released in 3 weeks.
pseudony 9mo ago
Same issue (I am Danish). Have you tested alternatives? I grabbed Open Code and a Minimax m2.1 subscription, even just the 10usd/mo one to test with. Result? We designed a spec for a slight variation of a tool for which I wrote a spec with Claude - same problem (process supervisor tool), from scratch. Honestly, it worked great, I have played a little further with generating code (this time golang), again, I am happy. Beyond that, Glm4.7 should also be great. See https://dev.to/kilocode/open-weight-models-are-getting-serious-glm-47-vs-minimax-m21-42g7 https://dev.to/kilocode/open-weight-models-are-getting-serio... It is a recent case story of vibing a smaller tool with kilo code, comparing output from minimax m2.1 and Glm4.7 Honestly, just give it a whirl - no need to send money to companies/nations your disagree with with.
- nunodonato 9mo ago
  I've been using GLM 4.7 with Claude Code. best of both worlds. Canceled my Anthropic subscription due to the US politics as well. Already started my "withdrawal" in Jan 2025, Anthropic was one of the few that was left
  - bigyabai 9mo ago
    I'm in the same boat. Sonnet was overkill for me, and GLM is cheap and smart enough to spit out boilerplate and FFMPEG commands whenever it's asked. $20/month is a bit of an insane ask when the most valuable thing Anthropic makes is the free Claude Code CLI.
    - stavros 9mo ago
      I don't know, I max out my Opus limits regularly. I guess it depends on usage.
    - mikenew 9mo ago
      I've recently switched to OpenCode and found it to be far better. Plus GML 4.7 is free at the moment, so for now it's a great no-cost setup.
    - Mashimo 9mo ago
mohsen1 9mo ago
With a good harness I am getting similar results with GLM 4.7. I am paying for TWO! max accounts and my agents are running 24/7. I still have a small Claude account to do some code reviews. Opus 4.5 does good reviews but at this point GLM 4.7 usually can do the same code reviews. If cost is an issue (for me it is, I pay out of pocket) go with GLM 4.7
- imiric 9mo ago
  Your GitHub profile is... disturbing. 1,354 commits and 464 pull requests in January so far. Regardless of how productive those numbers may seem, that amount of code being published so quickly is concerning, to say the least. It couldn't have possibly been reviewed by a human or properly tested. If this is the future of software development, society is cooked.
  - gcr 9mo ago
    You may not like it but this is what a 10x developer looks like. :-)
    - genewitch 9mo ago
      you may enjoy spaghetti, but will you enjoy 10x spaghetti?
  - mohsen1 9mo ago
    It's mostly trying out my orchestration system (https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator and https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-orchestrator-action https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-orchestrator-action) in a repo using GH_PAT. Stuff like this: https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator-e2e-test/issues/485 https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator-e2e-test... Yes, the idea is to really, fully automate software engineering. I don't know if I am going to be successful but I'm on vacation and having fun! if Opus 4.5/GLM 4.7 can do so much already, I can only imagine what can be done in two years. Might as well adopt to this reality and learn how leverage this advancement
aussieguy1234 9mo ago
I could say the same about grok (although given there are better models for my use cases I don't use it). What part of divisive politics are you talking about here?

amrrs 9mo ago

Have you tried the new GLM 4.7?

throwaw12 9mo ago
yes I did, not on par with Opus 4.5. I use Opus 4.5 for planning, when I reach my usage limits fallback to GLM 4.7 only for implementing the plan, it still struggles, even though I configure GLM 4.7 as both smaller model and heavier model in claude code
davely 9mo ago
I've been using GLM 4.7 alongside Opus 4.5 and I can't believe how bad it is. Seriously. I spent 20 minutes yesterday trying to get GLM 4.7 to understand that a simple modal on a web page (vanilla JS and HTML!) wasn't displaying when a certain button was clicked. I hooked it up to Chrome MCP in Open Code as well. It constantly told me that it fixed the problem. In frustration, I opened Claude Code and just typed "Why won't the button with ID 'edit' work???!" It fixed the problem in one shot. This isn't even a hard problem (and I could have just fixed it myself but I guess sunk cost fallacy).
- bityard 9mo ago
  I've used a bunch of the SOTA models (via my work's Windsurf subscription) for HTML/CSS/JS stuff over the past few months. Mind you, I am not a web developer, these are just internal and personal projects. My experience is that all of the models seem to do a decent job of writing a whole application from scratch, up to a certain point of complexity. But as soon as you ask them for non-trivial modifications and bugfixes, they _usually_ go deep into rationalized rabbit holes into nowhere. I burned through a lot of credits to try them all and Gemini tended to work the best for the things I was doing. But as always, YMMV.
  - KolmogorovComp 9mo ago
    Exactly the same feedback
- Balinares 9mo ago
  Amazingly, just yesterday, I had Opus 4.5 crap itself extensively on a fairly simple problem -- it was trying to override a column with an aggregation function while also using it in a group-by without referring to the original column by its full qualified name prefixed with the table -- and in typical Claude fashion it assembled an entire abstraction layer to try and hide the problem under, before finally giving up, deleting the column, and smugly informing me I didn't need it anyway. That evening, for kicks, I brought the problem to GLM 4.7 Flash (Flash!) and it one-shot the right solution. It's not apples to apples, because when it comes down to it LLMs are statistical token extruders, and it's a lot easier to extrude the likely tokens from an isolated query than from a whole workspace that's already been messed up somewhat by said LLM. That, and data is not the plural of anecdote. But still, I'm easily amused, and this amused me. (I haven't otherwise pushed GLM 4.7 much and I don't have a strong opinion about about it.) But seriously, given the consistent pattern of knitting ever larger carpets to sweep errors under that Claude seems to exhibit over and over instead of identifying and addressing root causes, I'm curious what the codebases of people who use it a lot look like.
- girvo 9mo ago
  > I can't believe how bad it is This has been my consistent experience with every model prior to Opus 4.5, and every single open model I've given a go. Hopefully we will get there in another 6 months when Opus is distilled into new open models, but I've always been shocked at some of the claims around open models, when I've been entirely unable to replicate them. Hell, even Opus 4.5 shits the bed with semi-regularity on anything that's not completely greenfield for my usage, once I'm giving it tasks beyond some unseen complexity boundary.

sampton 9mo ago

Every time Dario opens his mouth it's something weird.

TylerLives 9mo ago

>how divisive they're in terms of politics What do you mean by this?

throwaw12 9mo ago
Dario said not nice words about China and open models in general: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-20/anthropic-ceo-says-selling-advanced-ai-chips-to-china-is-crazy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-20/anthropic...
- vlovich123 9mo ago
  I think the least politically divisive issue within the US is concern about China’s growth as it directly threatens the US’s ability to set the world’s agenda. It may be politically divisive if you are aligned with Chinese interests but I don’t see anything politically divisive for a US audience. I expect Chinese CEOs speak in similar terms to a Chinese audience in terms of making sure they’re decoupled from the now unstable US political machine.
  - cmrdporcupine 9mo ago
    "... for a US audience" And that's the rub. Many of us are not.
  - subscribed 9mo ago
    Looking at the last year's US agenda I'm okay with that.
- Levitz 9mo ago
  I mean, there's no way it's about this right? Being critical of favorable actions towards a rival country shouldn't be divisive, and if it is, well, I don't think the problem is in the criticism. Also the link doesn't mention open source? From a google search, he doesn't seem to care much for it.
- giancarlostoro 9mo ago

mortsnort 9mo ago

They were just waiting for someone in the comments to ask!

mhuffman 9mo ago
It really is the best way to incentivize politeness!
stuckkeys 9mo ago
I loled hard at this. Thank you kind stranger.
zeppelin101 9mo ago
Someone has to take the first step. Let's be grateful to the brave anon HN poster for stepping up.

WarmWash 9mo ago

The Chinese labs distill the SOTA models to boost the performance of theirs. They are a trailer hooked up (with a 3-6 month long chain) to the trucks pushing the technology forwards. I've yet to see a trailer overtake it's truck. China would need an architectural breakthrough to leap American labs given the huge compute disparity.

aaa_aaa 9mo ago
No all they need is time. I am awaiting the dowfall of the ai hegemony and hype with popcorn at hand.
mhuffman 9mo ago
I would be happy with an openweight 3 month old Claude
- cmrdporcupine 9mo ago
  DeepSeek 3.2 is frankly fairly close to that. GLM 4.7 as well. They're basically around Sonnet 4 level.
miklosz 9mo ago
I have seen indeed a trailer overtake its truck. Not a beautiful view.
- digdugdirk 9mo ago
  Agreed. I do think the metaphor still holds though. A financial jackknifing of the AI industry seems to be one very plausible outcome as these promises/expectations of the AI companies starts meeting reality.
overfeed 9mo ago
Care to explain how the volume of AI research papers authored by Chinese researchers[1] has exceeded US-published ones? Time-traveling plagiarism perhaps, since you believe the US is destined to lead always. 1. Chinese researcher in China, to be more specific.

Onavo 9mo ago

Well DeepSeek V4 is rumored to be in that range and will be released in 3 weeks.

pseudony 9mo ago

Same issue (I am Danish). Have you tested alternatives? I grabbed Open Code and a Minimax m2.1 subscription, even just the 10usd/mo one to test with. Result? We designed a spec for a slight variation of a tool for which I wrote a spec with Claude - same problem (process supervisor tool), from scratch. Honestly, it worked great, I have played a little further with generating code (this time golang), again, I am happy. Beyond that, Glm4.7 should also be great. See https://dev.to/kilocode/open-weight-models-are-getting-serious-glm-47-vs-minimax-m21-42g7 https://dev.to/kilocode/open-weight-models-are-getting-serio... It is a recent case story of vibing a smaller tool with kilo code, comparing output from minimax m2.1 and Glm4.7 Honestly, just give it a whirl - no need to send money to companies/nations your disagree with with.

nunodonato 9mo ago
I've been using GLM 4.7 with Claude Code. best of both worlds. Canceled my Anthropic subscription due to the US politics as well. Already started my "withdrawal" in Jan 2025, Anthropic was one of the few that was left
- bigyabai 9mo ago
  I'm in the same boat. Sonnet was overkill for me, and GLM is cheap and smart enough to spit out boilerplate and FFMPEG commands whenever it's asked. $20/month is a bit of an insane ask when the most valuable thing Anthropic makes is the free Claude Code CLI.
  - stavros 9mo ago
    I don't know, I max out my Opus limits regularly. I guess it depends on usage.
  - mikenew 9mo ago
    I've recently switched to OpenCode and found it to be far better. Plus GML 4.7 is free at the moment, so for now it's a great no-cost setup.
  - Mashimo 9mo ago

mohsen1 9mo ago

With a good harness I am getting similar results with GLM 4.7. I am paying for TWO! max accounts and my agents are running 24/7. I still have a small Claude account to do some code reviews. Opus 4.5 does good reviews but at this point GLM 4.7 usually can do the same code reviews. If cost is an issue (for me it is, I pay out of pocket) go with GLM 4.7

imiric 9mo ago
Your GitHub profile is... disturbing. 1,354 commits and 464 pull requests in January so far. Regardless of how productive those numbers may seem, that amount of code being published so quickly is concerning, to say the least. It couldn't have possibly been reviewed by a human or properly tested. If this is the future of software development, society is cooked.
- gcr 9mo ago
  You may not like it but this is what a 10x developer looks like. :-)
  - genewitch 9mo ago
    you may enjoy spaghetti, but will you enjoy 10x spaghetti?
- mohsen1 9mo ago
  It's mostly trying out my orchestration system (https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator and https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-orchestrator-action https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-orchestrator-action) in a repo using GH_PAT. Stuff like this: https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator-e2e-test/issues/485 https://github.com/mohsen1/claude-code-orchestrator-e2e-test... Yes, the idea is to really, fully automate software engineering. I don't know if I am going to be successful but I'm on vacation and having fun! if Opus 4.5/GLM 4.7 can do so much already, I can only imagine what can be done in two years. Might as well adopt to this reality and learn how leverage this advancement

aussieguy1234 9mo ago

I could say the same about grok (although given there are better models for my use cases I don't use it). What part of divisive politics are you talking about here?