‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Livenerf: Has Opus 5.5 been nerfed yet?

922 points · 392 comments · bryan0

  1. jug · · focus · HN ↗
    We also have Nerf Bench:

    <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bridgebench.ai&#x2F;nerf-bench" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bridgebench.ai&#x2F;nerf-bench

    They test it on launch day, then benchmark it against that. A deviation of above 10% is considered a change. They&#x27;re currently tracking Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra.

    This bench famously detected a degradation of Opus 4.6 which Anthropic later blogged about. I personally think people sense nerfs more often than they happen and that it&#x27;s often about honeymoon effects.

    1. nsarrazin · · focus · HN ↗
      Used to work on a chat app where we had full control of the stack from the GPUs to the chat interface and everything in between. We were a small team too so I could be pretty confident that nothing changed in the stack and we still regularly had users complain that this or that model got nerfed. Perceived performance is actual performance over expectations and the latter just keeps increasing over time.

      It doesn’t mean the big labs don’t also nerf models! But if they didn’t you’d still have users complaining.

      1. booty · · focus · HN ↗
        For years I used to buy ASICS running shoes. Every year they released a new model of each shoe: &quot;Nimbus 23&quot;, then &quot;Nimbus 24&quot; the next year, etc. And every year people would complain in the user reviews about how each shoe was worse than the last.

        I was like, wow, I guess the shoes must be literal torture devices full of MRSA-covered broken glass at this point. They&#x27;ve been getting continuously worse for 24 consecutive years!

        Of course, what was really happening is that they were not getting worse, but naturally every year there was some small percentage of vocal dissatisfied users, while the silent majority simply enjoyed their shoes and didn&#x27;t have much to say about them.

        (The sorta-opposite happens in sneaker reviews as well. People will gush about how cushy the sole in some particular new sneaker is. Well, yeah, of course it&#x27;s cushy -- you&#x27;re comparing a new sneaker to your old sneaker where the foam had lost its bounce...)

        1. ck2 · · focus · HN ↗
          actually they were getting worse each year

          most running shoe series get heavier year to year as manufacturers turn to cheaper materials and add cushioning to try to attract more adopters

          it&#x27;s almost universal, very few manufacturers seem to be able to resist tampering

          (heavier shoes are slower, every three ounces is equal to another vo2max point lost)

          1. reducesuffering · · focus · HN ↗
            You&#x27;re literally doing what GP is describing. We have objective data on running shoes on: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;runrepeat.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;runrepeat.com&#x2F;

            The foams are getting better, the shoes lighter, they are more cushioned and more responsive in general. Especially the ASICS.

            1. ck2 · · focus · HN ↗
              nope

              you mean NEW MODELS are being introduced with lighter faster foams

              not the same model year to year

              modern example: Saucony Endorphin Speed

              v1 in 2020 was award winning

              v2 in 2021 was almost the same, more praise

              v3 bleh

              v4 v5 bleh bleh

              they cannot resist tampering

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.