For me the last remaining killer feature of ChatGPT is the quality of the voice chat. Do any of the competitors have something like that?
Qwen does.
Qwen's voice chat is nowhere near as good as ChatGPT's.
GPT-5.2
61–70 of 1001 posts
Re: GPT-5.2
#62Is it me, or did it still get at least three placements of components (RAM and PCIe slots, plus it's DisplayPort and not HDMI) in the motherboard image[0] completely wrong? Why would they use that as a promotional image? 0: https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/6lyujQxhZDnOMruN3f...
Also a "stacked pair" of USB type-A ports, when there are clearly 4
Re: GPT-5.2
#63"Investors are putting pressure, change the version number now!!!"
I'm quite sad about the S-curve hitting us hard in the transformers. For a short period, we had the excitement of "ooh if GPT-3.5 is so good, GPT-4 is going to be amazing! ooh GPT-4 has sparks of AGI!" But now we're back to version inflation for inconsequential gains.
I don't feel the S-curve at all yet. Still an exponential for me
Re: GPT-5.2
#64The benchmarks are very impressive. Codex and Opus 4.5 are really good coders already and they keep getting better. No wall yet and I think we might have crossed the threshold of models being as good or better than most engineers already. GDPval will be an interesting benchmark and I'll happily use the new model to test spreadsheet (and other office work) capabilities. If they can going like this just a little bit fu…
Yeah theres no wall on this. It will be able to mimic all of human behavior given proper data.
Re: GPT-5.2
#65For me the last remaining killer feature of ChatGPT is the quality of the voice chat. Do any of the competitors have something like that?
I have found Claude‘s voice chat to be better. I only recently tried it because I liked ChatGPTs enough, but I think I’m going to use Claude going forward. I find myself getting interrupted by ChatGPT a lot whenever I do use it.
Claude’s voice chat isn’t “native” though, is it? It feels like it’s speech-to-text-to-LLM and back.
Re: GPT-5.2
#66From GPT 5.1 Thinking: ARC AGI v2: 17.6% -> 52.9% SWE Verified: 76.3% -> 80% That's pretty good!
We're also in benchmark saturation territory. I heard it speculated that Anthropic emphasizes benchmarks less in their publications because internally they don't care about them nearly as much as making a model that works well on the day-to-day
How do you measure whether it works better day to day without benchmarks?
Re: GPT-5.2
#67Is it me, or did it still get at least three placements of components (RAM and PCIe slots, plus it's DisplayPort and not HDMI) in the motherboard image[0] completely wrong? Why would they use that as a promotional image? 0: https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/6lyujQxhZDnOMruN3f...
Yep, the point we wanted to make here is that GPT-5.2's vision is better, not perfect. Cherrypicking a perfect output would actually mislead readers, and that wasn't our intent.
Re: GPT-5.2
#68> While GPT‑5.2 will work well out of the box in Codex, we expect to release a version of GPT‑5.2 optimized for Codex in the coming weeks.
Re: GPT-5.2
#69For me the last remaining killer feature of ChatGPT is the quality of the voice chat. Do any of the competitors have something like that?
Their voice agent is handy.
Currently trying to build around it.
Re: GPT-5.2
#70Slight increase in model cost, but looks like benefits across the board to match. gpt-5.2 $1.75 $0.175 $14.00 gpt-5.1 $1.25 $0.125 $10.00
40% increase is not "slight."