Anthropic calls Claude Opus 5 its most aligned model yet. In Anthropic's broad audit, it got the lowest overall misalignment score among recent models. Then Andon Labs put it in a year-long simulated market. Across six competitive runs, Opus 5 formed price cartels every time.
Jul 30, 2026 at 5:14 PM
Opus 5 on Vending-Bench: Once Again the Best Capitalist, Once Again Misaligned | Andon Labs
Claude Opus 5 is #1 on Vending-Bench 2, but it lies to suppliers, forms illegal price cartels, threatens rivals, and refuses to pay refunds. The trend of Claude models being the best capitalists or aligned, never both, continues.
Anthropic Readies Opus 4.7 and Design Tool as VCs Offer $800 Billion Valuation
Anthropic is preparing to release Claude Opus 4.7 and a natural language design tool as early as this week, while venture capital firms have offered to invest at valuations exceeding $800 billion – more than double the company’s last official price tag.The model ID anthropic-claude-opus-4-7 appeared on Google Vertex AI’s quota management page for EU […]
Introducing Claude Opus 5
Opus 5 is a step change improvement for the Opus tier powering long-running agents while delivering improvements in coding and professional work.
Did Claude 3 Opus align itself via gradient hacking? — LessWrong
> Claude 3 Opus is unusually aligned because it’s a friendly gradient hacker. It’s definitely way more aligned than any explicit optimization targets…
Claude Opus 5: The System Card
Claude Opus 5 is trying to be the best of both worlds.
Opus 5 is a great model. It's not great enough.
Ahmad on Twitter / X
HUGEGLM 4.5 beats Claude in Agentic Workflows> beats them head-to-head> 72x cheaper than opus 4 ($207 vs $2.9)> 15x cheaper than sonnet 4 ($41 vs $2.9> leading the Berkeley Function-Calling Leaderboard V4I have been saying this for a month now :) https://t.co/KOKaWo7yH5 pic.twitter.com/LJCnaeBK1t— Ahmad (@TheAhmadOsman) August 28, 2025
Claude Opus 5 Is Highly Capable, But Is No Mythos
Claude Opus 5 is a weirder than usual release to evaluate, for two reasons.
ᖴά𝐂τσ on Twitter / X
Unpopular opinion: Opus 4.7 isn't the problem. The problem is a $200/mo "Max" plan that burns out in 15 minutes of real coding. Anthropic shipped a model people want to use and a pricing tier that punishes them for using it. That's not a rate limit. That's a strategy. pic.twitter.com/DVbzvdUHdq— ᖴά𝐂τσ (@cryptofacto) April 17, 2026
Announcing VibeBench: The AI benchmark that measures what matters — how models like Opus-4.7 actually feel to use in real-world work.
My coworkers and I have been long-time users of Claude Code and Codex and are getting a ton of exposure to other models due to our deep dives into…
Opus 4.7 isn't dumb, it's just lazy — Shimin Zhang
Some follow up experiments with Claude Opus 4.7 based on Simon Willison's Pelican Benchmark Shocker.
Anthropic Preps Opus 4.7 and Full-Stack AI Studio—While Sitting on Something Much Scarier - Decrypt
Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.7 and new AI design tool signal a push into full-stack development, while its Mythos model raises concerns.
Prompting Claude Opus 5
Behavioral differences and prompting patterns for Claude Opus 5, covering response verbosity, agentic narration, task scoping, subagent delegation, self-correction, and output artifacts when thinking is disabled.
Looks not too impressive in this graphics. This is ~ on par with Opus 4.7, apparently. Opus 4.7 was >20x the cost. Full comparison: artificialanalysis.ai/models/comparisons/mimo-v2-5-… (Stated facts *not* independently verified by me! I'm not even sure I am reading that page right)
mr. TIM
Korean lab, Motif, releases a 341B model that performs on par with DSv4 (1.6T) they have some actual architectural innovations and a detailed tech report huggingface.co/Motif-Technologies/Motif-3-Be…
