Repository navigation
0.4.1: re-measured long sessions (5 per strategy, with lean); corrected claims - #7
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…guard-lowers-cost claim; 0.4.1 Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Re-ran the long-session benchmark with 5 sessions per strategy and the new lean default (about $7 of new runs). Findings: the cache guard cuts switches (6-7 to 1) and halves cache re-writes but does not lower cost (guard on and off both +42% vs Opus; my earlier +24% vs +38% on 3 sessions was noise and is retracted). Lean averaged the same as Opus ($0.475 vs $0.476), bimodal $0.26-$0.63 per session; plain Sonnet was 43% cheaper. README, benchmarks README, site, cache chart and changelog updated to say so.