211–220 of 868 posts
I no longer want to support OpenAI at all. Regardless of benchmarks or real world performance.
Also, Anthropic/Gemini/even Kimi models are pretty good for what its worth. I used to use chatgpt and I still sometimes accidentally open it but I use Gemini/Claude nowadays and I personally find them to be better anyways too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The model was released less than an hour ago, and somehow you've been able to form such a strong opinion about it. Impressive!
It's more hedonic adaptation, people just aren't as impressed by incremental changes anymore over big leaps. It's the same as another thread yesterday where someone said the new MacBook with the latest processor doesn't excite them anymore, and it's because for most people, most models are good enough and now it's all about applications. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47232453#47232735
Bit concerning that we see in some cases significantly worse results when enabling thinking. Especially for Math, but also in the browser agent benchmark. Not sure if this is more concerning for the test time compute paradigm or the underlying model itself. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something though? I'm assuming 5.4 and 5.4 Thinking are the same underlying model and that's not just marketing.
I believe you are looking at GPT 5.4 Pro. It's confusing in the context of subscription plan names, Gemini naming and such. But they've had the Pro version of the GPT 5 models (and I believe o3 and o1 too) for a while. It's the one you have access to with the top ~$200 subscription and it's available through the API for a MUCH higher price ($2.5/$15 vs $30/$180 for 5.4 per 1M tokens), but the performance improvement…
The performance improvement isn't marginal if you're doing something particularly novel/difficult.
What is Pro exactly and is it available in Codex CLI?
It’s not. It’s their ultra thinking model that’s really good but takes 40 minutes to come up with an answer
More discussion here on the blog post announcement which has been confusingly penalized by Hacker News's algorithm: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47265005
83% win rate over industry professionals across 44 occupations. I'd believe it on those specific tasks. Near-universal adoption in software still hasn't moved DORA metrics. The model gets better every release. The output doesn't follow. Just had a closer look on those productivity metrics this week: https://philippdubach.com/posts/93-of-developers-use-ai-codi...
This March 2026 blog post is citing a 2025 study based on Sonnet 3.5 and 3.7 usage. Given that organization who ran the study [1] has a terrifying exponential as their landing page, I think they'd prefer that it's results are interpreted as a snapshot of something moving rather than a constant. [1] - https://metr.org/
These releases are lacking something. Yes, they optimised for benchmarks, but it’s just not all that impressive anymore. It is time for a product, not for a marginally improved model.
can anyone compare the $200/mo codex usage limits with the $200/mo claude usage limits? It’s extremely difficult to get a feel for whether switching between the two is going to result in hitting limits more or less often, and it’s difficult to find discussion online about this. In practice, if I buy $200/mo codex, can I basically run 3 codex instances simultaneously in tmux, like I can with claude code pro max, all d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Can't you continue to use to older model, if you prefer the pricing? But they also claim this new model uses fewer tokens, so it still might ultimately be cheaper even if per token cost is higher.
Anthropic is pulling the plug on Haiku 3 in a couple months, and they haven't released anything in that price range to replace it.