Unify feedback file structure across harness folders
Applied unified structure template to key feedback files: Structure now includes: 1. Standard header (Model/Size/Provider/Harness/Date) 2. Quick Reference table 3. Benchmark Results (with harness+model note) 4. What Worked Well 5. Issues Encountered (with severity levels) 6. Configuration (if applicable) 7. Source References (with descriptions) Files restructured: - forgecode/feedback/frontier/gpt-5.4.md - forgecode/feedback/frontier/claude-opus-4.6.md - hermes/feedback/frontier/claude-sonnet-feedback.md Also created FEEDBACK_TEMPLATE.md as a style guide for all future feedback files.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -1,64 +1,88 @@
|
||||
# Claude Opus 4.6 with ForgeCode - Feedback Report
|
||||
|
||||
**Model:** Claude Opus 4.6
|
||||
**Size:** [Not specified]
|
||||
**Provider:** Anthropic
|
||||
**Harness:** ForgeCode
|
||||
**Source References:** DEV Community (Liran Baba), ForgeCode Blog, Reddit r/ClaudeCode
|
||||
**Date Compiled:** April 9, 2026
|
||||
**Date Compiled:** April 9, 2026
|
||||
**Source References:** DEV Community (Liran Baba), ForgeCode Blog, Reddit r/ClaudeCode
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Benchmark Performance
|
||||
## Quick Reference
|
||||
|
||||
### TermBench 2.0 (Self-Reported via ForgeCode)
|
||||
| Attribute | Value |
|
||||
|-----------|-------|
|
||||
| Model | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|
||||
| Provider | Anthropic |
|
||||
| Context Window | 200K tokens |
|
||||
| Best For | Complex reasoning, large codebases, long-horizon tasks |
|
||||
| Cost | ~$15/M input, ~$75/M output |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Benchmark Results
|
||||
|
||||
### Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Harness-Specific)
|
||||
- **Score:** 81.8% (tied for #1)
|
||||
- **Comparison:** Claude Code + Opus 4.6 scored 58.0% (Rank #39)
|
||||
- **Harness:** ForgeCode
|
||||
- **Comparison:** Claude Code + Opus 4.6: 58.0% (Rank #39)
|
||||
- **Gap:** ~24 percentage points in favor of ForgeCode harness
|
||||
- **Note:** Score reflects harness+model combination, not raw model capability
|
||||
|
||||
### SWE-bench Verified (Independent - Princeton/UChicago)
|
||||
### SWE-Bench Verified (Independent)
|
||||
- **ForgeCode + Claude 4:** 72.7%
|
||||
- **Claude Code + Claude 3.7 Sonnet (extended thinking):** 70.3%
|
||||
- **Gap:** Only 2.4 percentage points
|
||||
- **Gap:** Only 2.4 percentage points on independent validation
|
||||
- **Source:** Princeton/UChicago
|
||||
|
||||
**Key Insight:** The benchmark gap narrows significantly on independent validation. TermBench 2.0 results are self-reported by ForgeCode itself.
|
||||
### SWE-Bench Pro
|
||||
- **Score:** 57.3% (Rank varies)
|
||||
- **Behind:** Claude Mythos Preview (77.8%), GLM-5.1 (58.4%), GPT-5.4 (57.7%)
|
||||
- **Source:** llm-stats.com
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Real-World Performance Feedback
|
||||
|
||||
### Speed
|
||||
- **Observation:** "Noticeably faster than Claude Code. Not marginal, real."
|
||||
- **Test Case:** Adding post counter to blog index (Astro 6, ~30 files)
|
||||
- Claude Code: ~90 seconds
|
||||
- ForgeCode + Opus 4.6: <30 seconds
|
||||
- **Consistency:** Multi-file renames, component additions, layout restructuring all showed faster performance
|
||||
|
||||
### Why Faster
|
||||
1. **Rust binary** vs Claude Code's TypeScript (better startup/memory)
|
||||
2. **Context engine:** Indexes function signatures and module boundaries instead of dumping raw files (~90% context size reduction)
|
||||
3. **Selective context:** Pulls only what the agent needs
|
||||
|
||||
### Stability
|
||||
- **Assessment:** Excellent stability with Opus 4.6 through ForgeCode
|
||||
- **No tool call failures reported** (unlike GPT 5.4 experience)
|
||||
- Consistent performance across different task types
|
||||
**Key Insight:** The benchmark gap narrows significantly on independent validation. Terminal-Bench results are self-reported by harness developers.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## What Worked Well
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Multi-file refactoring:** Handles complex changes across file boundaries efficiently
|
||||
2. **Code comprehension:** Strong understanding of Astro/React components
|
||||
3. **Speed on complex tasks:** Consistently 3x faster than Claude Code on identical tasks
|
||||
4. **Planning with muse:** Plan output felt "more detailed and verbose than Claude Code's plan mode"
|
||||
1. **Speed**
|
||||
- **Observation:** "Noticeably faster than Claude Code. Not marginal, real."
|
||||
- **Test Case:** Adding post counter to blog index (Astro 6, ~30 files)
|
||||
- Claude Code: ~90 seconds
|
||||
- ForgeCode + Opus 4.6: <30 seconds
|
||||
- **Consistency:** Multi-file renames, component additions, layout restructuring all showed faster performance
|
||||
- **Why:** Rust binary vs TypeScript, context engine indexes signatures (~90% size reduction), selective context
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Multi-file Refactoring**
|
||||
- Handles complex changes across file boundaries efficiently
|
||||
- Strong understanding of Astro/React components
|
||||
- Consistently 3x faster than Claude Code on identical tasks
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Planning with Muse**
|
||||
- Plan output felt "more detailed and verbose than Claude Code's plan mode"
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Stability**
|
||||
- Excellent stability with Opus 4.6 through ForgeCode
|
||||
- No tool call failures reported (unlike GPT 5.4 experience)
|
||||
- Consistent performance across different task types
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Issues Encountered
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Ecosystem gaps:** No IDE extensions, no hooks, no checkpoints/rewind
|
||||
2. **No auto-memory:** Context doesn't persist between sessions
|
||||
3. **No built-in sandbox:** Requires manual `--sandbox` flag for isolation
|
||||
1. **Ecosystem Gaps** (Major)
|
||||
- **Description:** No IDE extensions, no hooks, no checkpoints/rewind
|
||||
- **Impact:** Less integrated workflow compared to Claude Code
|
||||
|
||||
2. **No Auto-Memory** (Minor)
|
||||
- **Description:** Context doesn't persist between sessions
|
||||
- **Impact:** Requires re-contextualization on new sessions
|
||||
|
||||
3. **No Built-in Sandbox** (Minor)
|
||||
- **Description:** Requires manual `--sandbox` flag for isolation
|
||||
- **Impact:** Security requires explicit configuration
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -76,6 +100,11 @@
|
||||
|
||||
## Source References
|
||||
|
||||
1. **DEV Community:** https://dev.to/liran_baba/forgecode-vs-claude-code-which-ai-coding-agent-actually-wins-36c
|
||||
2. **ForgeCode Blog:** https://forgecode.dev/blog/benchmarks-dont-matter/
|
||||
3. **Reddit r/ClaudeCode:** https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1royhni/someone_is_using_forgecodedev/
|
||||
1. **DEV Community - ForgeCode vs Claude Code**: https://dev.to/liran_baba/forgecode-vs-claude-code-which-ai-coding-agent-actually-wins-36c
|
||||
- Real-world performance comparison by Liran Baba
|
||||
|
||||
2. **ForgeCode Blog - Benchmarks Don't Matter**: https://forgecode.dev/blog/benchmarks-dont-matter/
|
||||
- Documentation of harness optimizations and benchmark methodology
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Reddit r/ClaudeCode**: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1royhni/someone_is_using_forgecodedev/
|
||||
- Community discussion on ForgeCode usage
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user