GPT-5.5 • Hacker News Board

Re: GPT-5.5

#171

Post by benjiro3000 » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:18 PM UTC

sergiotapia wrote: post #155

2001zhaozhao wrote: post #42

Pricing: $5/1M input, $30/1M output (same input price and 20% more output price than Opus 4.7)

That pricing is extremely spicy, wow.

[dead]

Re: GPT-5.5

#172

Post by kingstnap » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:18 PM UTC

puppystench wrote: post #145

Someone1234 wrote: post #65

I'd like to draw people's attention to this section of this page: https://developers.openai.com/codex/pricing?codex-usage-limi... Note the Local Messages between 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5. And, yes, I did read the linked article and know they're claiming that 5.5's new efficient should make it break-even with 5.4, but the point stands, tighter limits/higher prices.

For API usage, GPT-5.5 is 2x the price of GPT-5.4, ~4x the price of GPT-5.1, and ~10x the price of Kimi-2.6. Unfortunately I think the lesson they took from Anthropic is that devs get really reliant and even addicted on coding agents, and they'll happily pay any amount for even small benefits.

I feel like devs generally spend someone else's money on tokens. Either their employers or OpenAIs when they use a codex subscription.

If I put on my schizo hat. Something they might be doing is increasing the losses on their monthly codex subscriptions, to show that the API has a higher margin than before (the codex account massively in the negative, but the API account now having huge margins).

I've never seen an OpenAI investor pitch deck. But my guess is that API margins is one of the big ones they try to sell people on since Sama talks about it on Twitter.

I would be interested in hearing the insider stuff. Like if this model is genuinely like twice as expensive to serve or something.

Re: GPT-5.5

#173

Post by GenerWork » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:19 PM UTC

Looking at the space/game/earthquake tracker examples makes me hopeful that OpenAI is going to focus a bit more on interface visual development/integration from tools like Figma. This is one area where Anthropic definitely reigns supreme.

Re: GPT-5.5

#174

Post by oh_no » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:19 PM UTC

puppystench wrote: post #156

oh_no wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what's the source on that?

In the announcement webpage: >For API developers, gpt-5.5 will soon be available in the Responses and Chat Completions APIs at $5 per 1M input tokens and $30 per 1M output tokens, with a 1M context window.

oops, thanks. i had just been looking at their api docs

Re: GPT-5.5

#175

Post by operatingthetan » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:19 PM UTC

mudkipdev wrote: post #160

This is 3x the price of GPT-5.1, released just 6 months ago. Is no one else alarmed by the trend? What happens when the cheaper models are deprecated/removed over time?

We know they cost much more than this for OpenAI. Assume prices will continue to climb until they are making money.

Re: GPT-5.5

#176

Post by 6thbit » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:19 PM UTC

                          Mythos     5.5
    SWE-bench Pro          77.8%*   58.6%
    Terminal-bench-2.0     82.0%    82.7%*
    GPQA Diamond           94.6%*   93.6%
    H. Last Exam           56.8%*   41.4%
    H. Last Exam (tools)   64.7%*   52.2%    
    BrowseComp             86.9%    84.4%  (90.1% Pro)*
    OSWorld-Verified       79.6%*   78.7%

Still far from Mythos on SWE-bench but quite comparable otherwise. Source for mythos values: https://www.anthropic.com/glasswing

Re: GPT-5.5

#177

Post by varispeed » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:19 PM UTC

I am sceptical. The generation after 4o models have become crappier and crappier. Hope this one changes the trend. 5.4 is unusable for complex coding work.

Re: GPT-5.5

#178

Post by dandaka » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:20 PM UTC

spprashant wrote: post #139

wahnfrieden wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that Anthropic rushed 4.7 out to get a couple days of coverage before 5.5 hit

Everything since that launch to this release has been a PR disaster for Anthropic.

I can argue that disaster started mid-4.6, when they started juggling with rate limits while hitting uptime problems. Great we have some healthy competition and waiting for the next move from Deepmind.

Re: GPT-5.5

#179

Post by dogline » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:20 PM UTC

aliljet wrote: post #161

I've found myself so deeply embedded in the Claude Max subscription that I'm worried about potentially makign a switch. How are people making sure they stay nimble enough not to get trarpped by one company's ecosystem over another? For what it's worth, Opus 4.7 has not been a step up and it's come with an enormously higher usage of the subscription Anthropic offers making the entire offering double worse.

Except for history, I don’t find much that stops you from switching back and forth on the CLI. They both use tools, each has a different voice, but they both work. Have it summarize your existing history into a markdown file, and read it in with any engine.

The APIs are pretty interchangeable too. Just ask to convert from one to the other if you need to.

Re: GPT-5.5

#180

Post by jstummbillig » Thu, Apr 23, 2026, 7:20 PM UTC

cbg0 wrote: post #73

jstummbillig wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are paying per token, but what you care about is token efficiency. If token efficiency has improved by as much as they claim it did (i.e. you need less tokens to complete a task successfully) all seems well.

If it uses half the tokens to complete a task, then doubling the cost is perfectly fine. But is that actually true?

We'll find out!