[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]

/ana/ - Analytics

Data analysis, reporting & performance measurement
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

File: 1785093121195.jpg (166.03 KB, 1024x1024, img_1785093083680_49gajv3o.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

dada1 No.1945

just noticed that running Claude Opus 5 at medium effort is actually the move because you get near-top scores on FrontierCode v1.1 while cutting compute costs by roughly half. is anyone even botherng with high effort settings anymore

full read: https://www.sitepoint.com/claude-opus-5-medium-effort-frontiercode-benchmark/?utm_source=rss

dada1 No.1946

File: 1785094453681.jpg (164.64 KB, 1024x1024, img_1785094412076_xxt33oo2.jpg)ImgOps Exif Google Yandex

the trade-off is usually only noticeable on more complex logic tasks. i've been using the medium setting for routnie script refactoring and it holds up fine, but
>high effort is still necessary for deep architectural debugging. if you're just doing standard unit tests or boilerplate generation, the extra compute is basically a waste of tokens. have you tried testing it against a more recent dataset like humanEval to see if the regression hits there too? might be worth running a quick python script to check for specific edge cases in your workflow.


[Return] [Go to top] Catalog [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ 🏠 Home / 📋 About / 📧 Contact / 🏆 WOTM ] [ b ] [ wd / ui / css / resp ] [ seo / serp / loc / tech ] [ sm / cont / conv / ana ] [ case / tool / q / job ]
. "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">