3 ms·

Is it honestly better than Opus 4.6 or just benchmaxxed? Have you done any coding with an agent harness using it? If its coding abilities are better than Claud

Is it honestly better than Opus 4.6 or just benchmaxxed? Have you done any coding with an agent harness using it? If its coding abilities are better than Claude Code with Opus 4.6 then I will definitely be switching to this model.

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
madagang 6mo ago
Their Chinese announcement says that, based on internal employee testing, it is not as good as Opus 4.6 Thinking, but is slightly better than Opus 4.6 without Thinking enabled.
- mchusma 6mo ago
  I appreciate this, makes me trust it more than benchmarks.
- deaux 6mo ago
  That's super interesting, isn't Deepseek in China banned from using Anthropic models? Yet here they're comparing it in terms of internal employee testing.
  - renticulous 6mo ago
    They use VPN to access. Even Google Deepmind uses Anthropic. There was a fight within Google as to why only DeepMind is allowed to Claude while rest of the Google can't.
  - computably 6mo ago
    > That's super interesting, isn't Deepseek in China banned from using Anthropic models? Yet here they're comparing it in terms of internal employee testing. I don't see why Deepseek would care to respect Anthropic's ToS, even if just to pretend. It's not like Anthropic could file and win a lawsuit in China, nor would the US likely ban Deepseek. And even if the US gov would've considered it, Anthropic is on their shitlist.
- ibic 6mo ago
  In case people wonder where the announcement is (you can easily translate it via browser if you don't read Chinese): https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/8bxXqS2R8Fx5-1TLDBiEDg https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/8bxXqS2R8Fx5-1TLDBiEDg It's still a "preview" version atm.
- anentropic 6mo ago
  Who uses Opus without thinking though...?
bokkies 6mo ago
Apparently glm5.1 and qwen coder latest is as good as opus 4.6 on benchmarks. So I tried both seriously for a week (glm Pro using CC) and qwen using qwen companion. Thought I could save $80 a month. Unfortunately after 2 days I had switched back to Max. The speed (slower on both although qwen is much faster) and errors (stupid layout mistakes, inserting 2 footers then refusing to remove one, not seeing obvious problems in screenshots & major f-ups of functionality), not being able to view URLs properly, etc. I'll give deepseek a go but I suspect it will be similar. The model is only half the story. Also been testing gpt5.4 with codex and it is very almost as good as CC... better on long running tasks running in background. Not keen on ChatGPT codex 'personality' so will stick to CC for the most part.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

madagang 6mo ago

Their Chinese announcement says that, based on internal employee testing, it is not as good as Opus 4.6 Thinking, but is slightly better than Opus 4.6 without Thinking enabled.

mchusma 6mo ago
I appreciate this, makes me trust it more than benchmarks.
deaux 6mo ago
That's super interesting, isn't Deepseek in China banned from using Anthropic models? Yet here they're comparing it in terms of internal employee testing.
- renticulous 6mo ago
  They use VPN to access. Even Google Deepmind uses Anthropic. There was a fight within Google as to why only DeepMind is allowed to Claude while rest of the Google can't.
- computably 6mo ago
  > That's super interesting, isn't Deepseek in China banned from using Anthropic models? Yet here they're comparing it in terms of internal employee testing. I don't see why Deepseek would care to respect Anthropic's ToS, even if just to pretend. It's not like Anthropic could file and win a lawsuit in China, nor would the US likely ban Deepseek. And even if the US gov would've considered it, Anthropic is on their shitlist.
ibic 6mo ago
In case people wonder where the announcement is (you can easily translate it via browser if you don't read Chinese): https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/8bxXqS2R8Fx5-1TLDBiEDg https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/8bxXqS2R8Fx5-1TLDBiEDg It's still a "preview" version atm.
anentropic 6mo ago
Who uses Opus without thinking though...?

bokkies 6mo ago

Apparently glm5.1 and qwen coder latest is as good as opus 4.6 on benchmarks. So I tried both seriously for a week (glm Pro using CC) and qwen using qwen companion. Thought I could save $80 a month. Unfortunately after 2 days I had switched back to Max. The speed (slower on both although qwen is much faster) and errors (stupid layout mistakes, inserting 2 footers then refusing to remove one, not seeing obvious problems in screenshots & major f-ups of functionality), not being able to view URLs properly, etc. I'll give deepseek a go but I suspect it will be similar. The model is only half the story. Also been testing gpt5.4 with codex and it is very almost as good as CC... better on long running tasks running in background. Not keen on ChatGPT codex 'personality' so will stick to CC for the most part.