3 ms·
With such a huge leap, i’m confused why they didn’t call it Sonnet 5? As someone who uses Sonnet 4.5 for 95% tasks due to costs, i’m pretty excited to try 4.6 a
by quacky_batak 8mo ago
With such a huge leap, i’m confused why they didn’t call it Sonnet 5? As someone who uses Sonnet 4.5 for 95% tasks due to costs, i’m pretty excited to try 4.6 at the same price
- Retr0id 8mo agoIt'd be a bit weird to have the Sonnet numbering ahead of the Opus numbering. The Opus 4.5->4.6 change was a little more incremental (from my perspective at least, I haven't been paying attention to benchmark numbers), so I think the Opus numbering makes sense.
- Sajarin 8mo agoSonnet numbering has been weirder in the past. Opus 3.5 was scrapped even though Sonnet 3.5 and Haiku 3.5 were released. Not to mention Sonnet 3.7 (while Opus was still on version 3) Shameless source: https://sajarin.com/blog/modeltree/ https://sajarin.com/blog/modeltree/
- cobolexpert 8mo agoI like this tree visualization! The background with little squares is making the text difficult to read, though.
- Sajarin 8mo agoThanks for the feedback friend, updated to make it (hopefully) a little easier to read!
- yonatan8070 8mo agoMaybe they're numbering the models based on internal architecture/codebase revisions and Sonnet 4.6 was trained using the 4.6 tooling, which didn't change enough to warrant 5?