logoalt Hacker News

nostrademonsyesterday at 8:35 PM3 repliesview on HN

Why? They just closed a $13B funding round. Entirely possible that they're selling below-cost to gain marketshare; on their current usage the cloud computing costs shouldn't be too bad, while the benefits of showing continued growth on their frontier models is great. Hell, for all we know they may have priced Opus 4.1 above cost to show positive unit economics to investors, and then drop the price of Opus 4.5 to spur growth so their market position looks better at the next round of funding.


Replies

jsnelltoday at 12:47 AM

Nobody subsidizes LLM APIs. There is a reason to subsidize free consumer offerings: those users are very sticky, and won't switch unless the alternative is much better.

There might be a reason to subsidize subscriptions, but only if your value is in the app rather than the model.

But for API use, the models are easily substituted, so market share is fleeting. The LLM interface being unstructured plain text makes it simpler to upgrade to a smarter model than than it used to be to swap a library or upgrade to a new version of the JVM.

And there is no customer loyalty. Both the users and the middlemen will chase after the best price and performance. The only choice is at the Pareto frontier.

Likewise there is no other long-term gain from getting a short-term API user. You can't train out tune on their inputs, so there is no classic Search network effect either.

And it's not even just about the cost. Any compute they allocate to inference is compute they aren't allocating to training. There is a real opportunity cost there.

I guess your theory of Opus 4.1 having massive margins while Opus 4.5 has slim ones could work. But given how horrible Anthropic's capacity issues have been for much of the year, that seems unlikely as well. Unless the new Opus is actually cheaper to run, where are they getting the compute from for the massive usage spike that seems inevitable.

show 1 reply
BoorishBearsyesterday at 8:46 PM

Eh, I'm testing it now and it seems a bit too fast to be the same size, almost 2x the Tokens Per Second and much lower Time To First Token.

There are other valid reasons for why it might be faster, but faster even while everyone's rushing to try it at launch + a cost decrease leaves me inclined to believe it's a smaller model than past Opus models

show 1 reply
dingnutsyesterday at 8:47 PM

[dead]