Comment

Comment by Topfi

Very preliminary testing is very promising, seems far more precise in code changes over GPT-5 models in not ingesting irrelevant to the task at hand code sections for changes which tends to make GPT-5 as a coding assistant take longer than sometimes expected. With that being the case, it is possible that in actual day-to-day use, Haiku 4.5 may be less expensive than the raw cost breakdown may appear initially, though the increase is significant.

Branding is the true issue that Anthropic has though. Haiku 4.5 may (not saying it is, far to early to tell) be roughly equivalent in code output quality compared to Sonnet 4, which would serve a lot users amazingly well, but by virtue of the connotations smaller models have, alongside recent performance degradations making users more suspicious than beforehand, getting these do adopt Haiku 4.5 over Sonnet 4.5 even will be challenging. I'd love to know whether Haiku 3, 3.5 and 4.5 are roughly in the same ballpark in terms of parameters and course, nerdy old me would like that to be public information for all models, but in fairness to companies, many would just go for the largest model thinking it serves all use cases best. GPT-5 to me is still most impressive because of its pricing relative to performance and Haiku may end up similar, though with far less adoption. Everyone believes their task requires no less than Opus it seems after all.

For reference:

Haiku 3: I $0.25/M, O $1.25/M

Haiku 4.5: I $1.00/M, O $5.00/M

GPT-5: I $1.25/M, O $10.00/M

GPT-5-mini: I $0.25/M, O $2.00/M

GPT-5-nano: I $0.05/M, O $0.40/M

GLM-4.6: I $0.60/M, O $2.20/M

parent Topfi 1 year ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton