Claude · Last 7 days
Claude Opus 4.6
0–100 · higher means more positive community experience, not benchmark performance.
Updated 2026-10-03 22:17 UTC · 2026-09-26 – 2026-10-03 UTCDiscussion overview
What the full sample discusses
All platforms · 13 eligible comments over 7 days, including usage-limit feedback; deduplicated by source and comment.
- General text · 6 comments: 5 positive / 0 negative / 1 mixed or neutral
- Reasoning · 4 comments: 3 positive / 1 negative / 0 mixed or neutral
- Usage limits · 2 comments: 0 positive / 1 negative / 1 mixed or neutral
- Coding · 1 comments: 1 positive / 0 negative / 0 mixed or neutral
Comments may cover multiple dimensions; counts are not additive or equivalent to the weighted score. Links show selected source excerpts.
Recent change
Rolling 7-day score: −9.3 points vs 7 days ago. Discussion mix can affect scores; this does not establish a cause.
Source coverage and discussion concentration
Reddit 8 · Zhihu 5
13 identifiable discussions cover 13/13 comments; the largest has 1. Remaining thread identities are unknown; this is not a count of independent users.
Selected individual opinions
One user felt that Claude Opus 4.6 performs strongly in English writing, with relatively stable writing style and logic. One user noted that Claude Opus 4.6 is notorious for token management issues and typically has very low usage caps when accessed through third-party platforms.
About the sample and scores
As of 2026-10-03 22:17:03 UTC, Claude Opus 4.6 in the Claude family has 13 explicitly attributed community comments in the last 7 days; its community score is 60.4/100. Available category scores include General text 66.2/100 (n=6). Scoring method and sources
RECENT EXPERIENCE
How the Experience Index is changing
30 days of rolling 7-day scores at each daily snapshot. The vertical scale adapts to the data. Missing or insufficient samples leave gaps; today is still updating.
Tap or use ← → for dates, scores and sample sizes. Blank dates have insufficient data.
No trend available
RedNote · Not enough opinions · 0 scored comments · Read platform reviews →
ONE MODEL, DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES
Across the communities
Scored separately for each platform, with different samples and audiences. Platform scores are not simply averaged; scored counts exclude quota-only comments.
Scores range from 0 to 100. Select a platform for its trend and reviews. Latest opinion time is not crawler health.
Explore long-term changes & analysis
This version is not yet tracked since release; recent 7-day experience is shown above.
Community reviews
Selected comments from the last 7 days. The balance of excerpts does not represent the share of positive reviews.
0 selected excerpts
Community reports about limits cannot establish official allowances.
Show original
英文写作的话，Claude Opus 5.5 或者 Claude Opus 4.6 这个级别就比较强了，文笔和逻辑都比较稳。
Comment context
Cyber work that opus 5.5 refused T_T
Comment context
Well a problem that 6.1 sol couldn’t fix without constant reiteration opus 4.6 fixed it in a single turn.
Show original
Claude Opus 4.6 在软件任务上的平均执行时间约为 14.5 小时（95%置信区间在 6 小时到 98 小时之间）
Show original
前一代模型（GLM-5.2和Opus 4.6）几乎无法完成
Comment context
In Chrome V8 vulnerability testing, GLM-5.3 successfully completed 50 end-to-end exploitations out of 410 attempts, while 3Claude Mythos Preview completed 56; the previous generation models (GLM-5.2 and Opus 4.6) were barely able to complete, and Kimi K3 and DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash also performed terribly.
Machine translatedShow original
在Chrome V8漏洞测试中，GLM-5.3在410次尝试里成功完成50次端到端利用，3Claude Mythos Preview则是56次；前一代模型（GLM-5.2和Opus 4.6）几乎无法完成，Kimi K3和DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash也是拉胯到不行。
No selected comments for this filter in the last 7 days.