This pre-IPO battle is very entertaining. Curious how it all ends
That's easy.
More tokens and bigger models pre-ipo to attract attention, limit everything post-ipo.
They did it before, will do it after.
OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
61–70 of 148 posts
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Questionable whether the enterprise market really is the most lucrative. The biggest of big tech all have significant revenue from the consumer market. Compare Apple, Google, Meta, to IBM, Salesforce, ServiceNow.
Enterprise market is paying by token and using a lot of tokens. Consumer market is paying a subscription that they can't raise too high or they'll lose users to competition. Seems to me that the enterprise market scales a lot higher.
it's really not much compared to the amount they are spending on training. 100 developers at $200 per month is just $20000
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#63I have a really strong suspicion that there is something different about OAI prepaid tokens in the API vs elsewhere. I've been able to get away with spending less than $150/m on average while many peers are hitting 10x that. I am curious how many on HN have manually configured their copilot install with a custom OAI token for 5.4/5.5. In my experience, the performance difference over the built in subscription models…
> any desire to have it run while I'm asleep seems absolutely ridiculous.
could that be the difference from your peers? :p (real question b/c if you brought it up you're probably seeing others do it)
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the right price, these model don't need to be the best, good enough will do. I think we're fast approaching good enough for most users.
This. Here's a quick experiment I did yesterday. I got a new $20 Claude subscription to try the new Fable model. I gave it a single prompt, and it barely finished, using up my whole session quota (it was at ~95% when it finished) and 10% of my weekly quota. For comparison, with the Kimi Code $40 subscription I can pretty much constantly run two/three agents in parallel for the whole week, and I never run out of quota…
A word of caution on this.
I've tried this too, and was disappointed.
Kimi generally benchmarks at "a bit more intelligent than Sonnet Medium" levels[1] and I'd agree broadly with this assessment.
If you have adapted your coding to rely on the agentic style that is doable in Opus 4.7+ then you will find Kimi disappointing.
If you are using it in a more targeted way then it can work well.
[1] https://artificialanalysis.ai/agents/coding-agents?agents=cl...
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have the consumer market but want the enterprise market, because it's a lot more lucrative, so they're probably going to just keep chasing that even though there's no signs they'll stop losing to Anthropic. They don't need to do that much to keep the consumer market because of momentum.
Questionable whether the enterprise market really is the most lucrative. The biggest of big tech all have significant revenue from the consumer market. Compare Apple, Google, Meta, to IBM, Salesforce, ServiceNow.
Apple, sure. But Google and Meta are really advertising companies, whose income stream comes from enterprises, big and small.
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fable is twice the size of Opus from what I gathered. So I'm not sure if 2x price translates to 2x profits as well. Not sure about GPT but it seems plausible they've also been increasing the model size with recent releases. (Progressively training a bigger model and easing into a profitable price range for that model scale?)
it looks like all AI is following the same pattern as GPT-3 again, building bigger models to achieve better results.
Which is actually good news if it still works
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#67The frontier labs commonly trade spots at the top of the benchmarks with each new model release. The timing of these price cut discussions says to me OpenAI has no imminent release that will be edging out Mythos/Fable. If so the question becomes when can they do so, or is this possibly a turning point where Anthropic keeps the crown to themselves for the foreseeable future.
> If so the question becomes when can they do so, or is this possibly a turning point where Anthropic keeps the crown to themselves for the foreseeable future.
This specific crown (Best Performing Model) appears to be made out of thorns: pay 100x more for maybe a 10% improvement in capabilities.
Not sure what the goal is, here.
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
At the right price, these model don't need to be the best, good enough will do. I think we're fast approaching good enough for most users.
OTOH, using the best is a competitive advantage when time = money. It's like giving your engineers a slow laptop because it's cheaper. It may be cheaper but not worth the cost.
> OTOH, using the best is a competitive advantage when time = money. It's like giving your engineers a slow laptop because it's cheaper. It may be cheaper but not worth the cost.
That doesn't imply giving your devs the best laptop makes any difference.
How much more productive will your devs be if you upgrade them from a 32GB RAM, 8-core laptop to a 768GB RAM 96-core threadripper?
In your analogy, Kimi may not be the 4-core celeron with 4GB of RAM, it's more like the 8-core AMD with 32GB of RAM.
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#69How does OpenAI plan to be profitable?
Ads of course
Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users
#70I have a really strong suspicion that there is something different about OAI prepaid tokens in the API vs elsewhere. I've been able to get away with spending less than $150/m on average while many peers are hitting 10x that. I am curious how many on HN have manually configured their copilot install with a custom OAI token for 5.4/5.5. In my experience, the performance difference over the built in subscription models…
> any desire to have it run while I'm asleep seems absolutely ridiculous. could that be the difference from your peers? :p (real question b/c if you brought it up you're probably seeing others do it)
The point I'm trying to make is the reason a lot of people are resorting to the 24/7 Ralph loops is because they're using weaker models that need an incredible number of attempts to make any progress. The Death Star has different game theoretic implications. You probably don't need it to be lasering entire planets while you sleep, assuming the laser system actually works as advertised. I've never had a copilot run that took so long that I had to get up from my PC. Maybe 10 minutes. What the hell can run for 24 hours and still converge in a meaningful way?