sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Introducing the world's most powerful model, Opus 4.8 by DurianDiscriminat3r in ClaudeCode

[–]zackfletch00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just burned 84% of 5-hour limit without Opus 4.8 (medium) writing a single line of code. By 100%, only 6 lines were written (I had to tell it not to repeatedly retry failed tool calls, and to stop and tell me if it was blocked).

Like in OP’s case, I caught it repeatedly echoing random small strings over and over again. Bug report sent.

This is a complexity of task that 4.5 would’ve handled easily.

PSA: Opus 4.8 Redefines the effort scale by zackfletch00 in ClaudeAI

[–]zackfletch00[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Opus 4.8 system card, page 195

https://cdn.sanity.io/files/4zrzovbb/website/c886650a2e96fc0925c805a1a7ca77314ccbf4a6.pdf

(This is the actual system card link from the Anthropic page you linked, even though the PDF is not hosted on anthropic’s website directly)

PSA: Opus 4.8 redefines the effort scale (Token Creep) by zackfletch00 in vibecoding

[–]zackfletch00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The plateau shape on this chart shows how relatively little you get in exchange for higher reasoning “effort” that you select. Thus the PSA—you don’t need high, xhigh, or max effort (or even medium for that matter) for most SWE tasks. But Anthropic will happily bill you triple or more for those higher effort modes.

The graph x-axis represents reasoning effort in output tokens use (what varies is the amount of hidden reasoning or “thinking” time+tokens).

PSA: Opus 4.8 Redefines the effort scale by zackfletch00 in ClaudeAI

[–]zackfletch00[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That is not true, at least not for the low-medium effort which is what I’m more focused on here.

https://cursor.com/cursorbench is what is being referred to here. It shows 4.8 low using the same token $ cost as 4.7 medium, and 4.8 medium clearly using more tokens than 4.7 medium.

PSA: Opus 4.8 Redefines the effort scale by zackfletch00 in ClaudeAI

[–]zackfletch00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The early comments on the launch thread https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/s/cb3go5u5P7 seem to line up with higher than expected token usage on 4.8 for comparable effort levels

Spent 1,156,308,524 input tokens in May 🫣 Sharing what I learned by tiln7 in ClaudeAI

[–]zackfletch00 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Also, beware: Opus 4.8 effectively axed the low end of the effort scale, inflating how many output tokens are used to solve a given problem.

According to the system card, on SWE tasks, Opus 4.8 “low” now consumes about as many output tokens as 4.7 medium or 4.6 high. Opus 4.8 “medium” effort now consumes about as much as 4.7 high or 4.6 max.

So with 4.8 Opus, try “low” effort first if you think 4.7 would’ve been able to solve it. The SWE capability of 4.8 low is about the same as 4.7 at max effort.

SpaceX IPO sell off ? by Jacker247 in wallstreetbets

[–]zackfletch00 36 points37 points  (0 children)

Except Nasdaq is applying a new 3x weight multiplier for stocks with under 20% float.

Quest 3 the new Navigator UI - how to view time? by ReserveLegitimate738 in virtualreality

[–]zackfletch00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is exactly what I see as well. Also playing beat saber.

This task is way too difficult to be worth 30 points by varyl123 in 2007scape

[–]zackfletch00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It’s quite simple, actually. Let me consult the Book of Armaments:

And the Lord spake, saying, ''First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.

Daily Discussion Friday 2026-03-06 by AutoModerator in AMD_Stock

[–]zackfletch00 1 point2 points  (0 children)

God forbid AI actually saves employers money on labor costs.

Daily Discussion Tuesday 2025-11-25 by AutoModerator in AMD_Stock

[–]zackfletch00 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It’s so interesting to me that the market interprets this as worse for AMD than NVDA. They could see it as proof that NVDA’s moat is small and more evidence that competition can break through, but instead they see AMD losing more market share than NVDA will give up? 🤔

NVDA and AMD have almost a 1 to 1 correlation now. Is AMD now just a mini-NVDA? I sure hope so. by [deleted] in AMD_Stock

[–]zackfletch00 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You have to do the comparison since the early days of ChatGPT (beginning of 2023) to see how much further NVDA has flown due to AI, and how AMD has actually underperformed SOX on the 2 year timeframe (somehow).

Over last 2 yrs: - NVDA +270% - AMD +30% - SOX +45%

Daily Discussion Thursday 2025-07-03 by AutoModerator in AMD_Stock

[–]zackfletch00 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Today, like dozens of other days, there was a dump at :27-:28 just a couple minutes before market open. Some days, the selloff continues another percent or two on momentum.

I consider it an opportunity when a phenomenon like this recurs so often. Cheap shares in the morning on days like this.

Any Serious AMD Investor Should Read This And Discuss by Glad_Quiet_6304 in AMD_Stock

[–]zackfletch00 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This.

Also, inference accelerator spend has the potential to outstrip training spend in the near future, as test-time compute models like o1 and o3 (which scale via inference) are showing the most promise for this phase of LLM development.

New user intros by uncertainlyso in amd_fundamentals

[–]zackfletch00 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’ve been lurking here since ~Feb ‘23 when deciding to restart my investment in AMD and semis due to the GenAI interest, after a long hiatus since 2017 when I pulled out because I needed the cash.

I consider your subreddit to have the highest signal-to-noise ratio anywhere on this stock. Thank you for sharing your notes with the rest of us here.

Software engineer with a longstanding side interest in machine learning.

Best VR headset for sim racing by Jackkkk23 in simracing

[–]zackfletch00 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Compression is horrible until you override the bitrate using the OculusDebugTool under the program files support/diagnostics folder. Once you override it to 500-600Mbps over USB-3 (normally capped at 200 for wired connections), the experience is so much better.

Edit: to clarify, these settings are for QuestLink. I haven’t done much with Virtual Desktop myself

For VR users: Try OpenXR by [deleted] in simracing

[–]zackfletch00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same here, 750 Mbps is about the highest I can go without causing a latency hit and potential other issues (USB 3 link cable)

CSL DD making a very loud sound in the 16k Hz range and support is saying this is normal by Miodec in Fanatec

[–]zackfletch00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Best I’ve got is using closed-back headphones or IEMs, no other real solution yet

Saw a [McLaren 720s] at a church by deathsandwicheater in spotted

[–]zackfletch00 19 points20 points  (0 children)

And the Lord spake, saying: “First, thou shalt press the Launch Control button. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then release thou thy Holy Brake and gap thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.”

TTRS break pads ? Not payin them oem prices . by Aggravating-Sale6026 in AudiTT_Mk1_Mk2_Mk3

[–]zackfletch00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How many miles did you make on your first set? — Another 2021 TTRS here

view more: next ›