Instead of a new model that's going to have unreasonably shallow usage limits, I wish they would:

1) address the claude 20x plan usage being only 6-7x the ceiling of the claude pro plan

2) either fix opus 5, make it completely free, or delete it entirely

▲ heurist 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I downgraded from the 20x today after learning that 20x only applies to 5 hour usage. I have barely used Claude/Claude Code in the last month and am considering downgrading further, even after this update.

▲ matheusmoreira 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Switch to OpenAI. I have statistically verified that their plans are good.

  Pro  20x = 60k credits/reset
  Pro   5x = 15k credits/reset
  Plus     =  3k credits/reset

  Pro  20x =  4 * Pro  5x
           = 20 * Plus

▲

heurist 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I've been using both for a few years. OpenAI's limits have always lasted much longer for me (depending on whether a monkey got in their machine or not). Aside from not lying about limits they also don't assume I'm developing some kind of nerve agent and lock me out when I ask basic questions in my domain or nag me about my late night work hours. There was a time last year when I strongly preferred using Anthropic models, but at some point something about the responses (or maybe the company) changed and I now find them particularly offputting relative to OpenAI. Hope they fix it because the industry needs more competition.

	▲	matheusmoreira 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> they also don't assume I'm developing some kind of nerve agent and lock me out I'm still having problems with that. OpenAI is a lot less annoying than Anthropic, but I still get obnoxious "this content can't be shown" messages in codex far too often.

▲ stefangordon 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Free Opus 5 is like getting a free STD.

▲ sidrag22 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Kinda surprised not to see their next update being an Opus 5.1, even if its minimal changes, they've already had to address it with the concise mode or whatever.

So my current usage as a Pro subscriber... Not able to even consider using "Sota" unless i shell out for 100$ a month, (lately i've been a bit burned out i am literally struggling to use 50% of my pro plan per week). Beyond that, I have given up entirely on the top Opus model and reverted back to 4.8. If i have work i deem somewhat complicated, i now have an openai 20$ sub, and i just toss out sol after planning with 4.8. Both subscriptions not anywhere close to capping my usage per week, one of them says i can't use their Sota unless i pay for 5x more usage, and the "best" model they do allow me to use, they are neglecting and its by far the worst model I've interacted with in 2026.

▲ Someone1234 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm legitimately out of the loop; what is going on/broken with Opus 5?

▲

sidrag22 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

it just doesn't interact good with human beings, and it leaves incredibly strange long winded comments within code filled with session context that will likely not be relevant later on.

Also always seems to have this annoying tendency to leave "questions for you" at the bottom of every output.

Just a high friction human interaction type model, imo should never have even been released, regardless if it scores better on whatever tests, its a horrible experience and a downgrade over past models.

▲

tstrimple 10 hours ago | parent [-]

I have to wonder if everyone else is just running these models raw without any custom instructions. I hear all these things about voice and code comments and those are all things I've dealt with long ago via claude.md instructions, rules, and hooks. My claude can already respond in any "voice" I want and the quantity and quality of comments is within my control.

	▲	disfictional 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Currently, I'm using custom instructions plus reinjecting the writing cues Opus 5 ignores most frequently via a UserPromptSubmit hook. Again and again, I'm reminding the model what voice I want. Again and again, Opus 5 ignores it.
	▲	jatins 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Opus 5 is remarkably bad at instruction following over long chats. I have to repeat “Be succint”, “talk like a friend or colleague would”, “no rambling” or some variant of it every few messages
	▲	sidrag22 8 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		it really just seems like people pump out that its on the end-user, and i just disagree. They have a walled garden around claude code and using their models within it, it should work instantly out of the box when going from an opus 4.8 to an opus 5.0 with the same workflows. it doesn't. claude.md for all my projects are fairly tight, its seldom where im upset at anything a model does, and if it happens, its likely because i swapped provider and didn't realize i was failing to feed it proper context beforehand. Opus 5.0 fails in different ways that I haven't had to deal with. Its insufferable with its choice of language, something I've never had to compensate for on any other model across any provider, so of course I have no preexisting rules for that, it also is sometimes just incredibly stubborn and just WONT finish, and requires several just "keep going" prompts. This is much different than the issues people would make fun of users for in regards to treating models like slot machines and just pulling the lever over and over, this is more its stopping for no reason short of its task, and literally just needs to be told to continue? absurd. Most of my workflows have reference material, with standards set, why opus 5.0 is the only model that fails to follow those standards and inserts wildly long weird code comments is not a failure on the end-user, thats the model failing. I can be MORE explicit of course, but i shouldnt need to be, this is supposed to be 5.0, its a downgrade. I went back to 4.8 and all these issues vanished.

▲

prohobo 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Some anecdata:

- It's extremely verbose and often incomprehensible when doing even basic tasks. Like it'll write a giant jargon-filled essay then end it by asking for a judgement call on something that references its own convoluted jargon.

- You can ask it to do research on a topic, and it'll just straight up be lazy, pretending it's really digging deep to find stuff when actually it's just grabbing cached SEO snippets off a search engine.

▲

purpleidea 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They've nerfed a bunch of models, especially Opus 5. Nobody knows why, but overall things have gone downhill significantly.

▲

the-grump 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Fable 5: I give it work, it tells me things that are true and that make sense, it does good work.

Opus 5: I give it work, it makes false statements and draws weird conclusions, I correct it and get it on the right track, it thrashes around but gives me something working though usually buggy.

5.6 Sol is probably on par with Opus 5 on ability but at least it doesn't waste as much of my time.

	▲	edg5000 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Agree on the false statements on Opus 5. I tested this, 4.8 also got the answer wrong but 4.7 got it right. And so did Sol and Fable.

▲

fooker 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's worse than 4.8/4.6 and more expensive at the same time.

▲

pram 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The comments it makes are so bad, long, and incomprehensible I just strip them all with sed these days.

▲

odiroot 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's a great story teller. Not really a good expert though.

▲

greenchair 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

try sol and you'll see

▲ zsoltkacsandi 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> either fix opus 5, make it completely free, or delete it entirely

They should pay for us for using it!