Is it bad that I hope it's not a significant improvement in coding?
Is it bad I quietly hope AI fails to live up to expectations?
GPT-5
71–80 of 1001 posts
Re: GPT-5
#72Is it bad that I hope it's not a significant improvement in coding?
No, it's not bad to hope that your industry and source of income isn't about to be gutted by corporations
Re: GPT-5
#73Disclaimer -> We are not a doctor or health advice, marketing -> More useful health answers
Re: GPT-5
#74What's going on with their SWE bench graph?[0]
GPT-5 non-thinking is labeled 52.8% accuracy, but o3 is shown as a much shorter bar, yet it's labeled 69.1%. And 4o is an identical bar to o3, but it's labeled 30.8%...
Re: GPT-5
#75Is it bad that I hope it's not a significant improvement in coding?
Seeing the system card https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/8124a3ce-ab78-4f06-96eb-49ea29ffb...
there is some improvements in some benchs and not else worthy of note in coding. i only took a peek though so i might be wrong
Re: GPT-5
#76$10 per million output tokens, wow
Re: GPT-5
#77The silent victory here is this seems like it is being built to be faster and cheaper than o3 while presenting a reasonable jump, which is an important jump in scaling law On the other hand if it's just getting bigger and slower it's not a good sign for LLMs
Personally, I am more concerned about accuracy than speed.
Re: GPT-5
#7874.9 on SWE-bench verified
88.0 on Aider Polygot
not bad i guess
Re: GPT-5
#79Seems LLMs really hit the wall.
Is there a graph somewhere that illustrates it?
Re: GPT-5
#80The marketing copy and the current livestream appear tautological: "it's better because it's better." Not much explanation yet why GPT-5 warrants a major version bump. As usual, the model (and potentially OpenAI as a whole) will depend on output vibe checks.
[deleted]