I like the fact that OpenAI went with a three-part celestial naming convention to one-up Anthropic's literary naming concention. Maybe we'll get Stellar and Galactic someday.
Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
501–510 of 797 posts
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#502Easily the most interesting part of this announcement is buried in the second to last paragraph: "We're also launching GPT‑5.6 Sol on Cerebras at up to 750 tokens per second in July, bringing frontier intelligence to customers at unprecedented speed. Access will initially be limited to select customers as we expand capacity." 750 tokens/s on a frontier model is going to be extremely interesting. I doubt this new vers…
> second to last
There's a word for this that you should never pass up an opportunity to use: penultimate. (You should also never pass up the opportunity to use "defenestrate," but it sadly does not apply here.)
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#503Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully like this (but smarter): https://chatjimmy.ai/
This is genuinely confusing to my senses. The future is going to be so strange/neat/me unemployed.
> strange/neat/me unemployed
I'm not sure if that's what you were going for, but I read it as if it were written by The Board in the game Control, and found myself with the appropriate level of existential dread.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#504Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hopefully like this (but smarter): https://chatjimmy.ai/
Wow.. what?! How is this so fast?! Where can I read more?
Funnily enough, pasting your comment straight into Jimmy leads to a... Funnily suboptimal answer that does not answer the question.
As someone else already contributed, this is driven by a Canadian startup taalas that basically makes chips that are llms, so everything is very fast but also, baked into the chip. Once this kind of stuff is a commodity in like 10 years, our world will be very, very different.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#505Earlier quoted context omitted.
No offense but have you considered the strong possibility that you're just holding it wrong? You're entitled to your opinion, but OP is hardly the first person to say something like this and is surrounded by tons of folks saying the exact same thing. Just because it sounds weird to you, doesn't mean it's not true.
Idk, all the great programmers I've come to respect are of the opinion that the code it outputs, while often useful, is not high quality. Likewise, all of the influencers and "thought leaders" I have seen on social media who I did not have a high opinion of previous to 2022, have all become AI influencers and make these kinds of claims. So while it's possible that the great programmers are not capable of using this t…
The tech has raised the floor not the ceiling.
Whether the latter happens remains to be seen.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#506Some interesting stats here about the current landscape https://arena.ai/leaderboard/agent Agent Arena (Dynamic ranking of models on how well they orchestrate tools for real-world agentic tasks, based on signals like tool reliability, task completion, and steerability.) Top 10, Highest rank to lowest Claude Fable 5 (High), Claude Opus 4.8 (Thinking), GPT 5.5 (xHigh), Claude Opus 4.7 (Thinking), GPT 5.5 (High), Claude…
The only real world task benchmark I know of is Scale Labs RLI https://labs.scale.com/leaderboard/rli Its clear to me these models are useless on any real world task, a 4% pass rate on $20-30/hr Upwork tasks. This whole trend of agentic engineering is a giant money grab.
Missing some recent models on that list, but I think most crucially, the harness is fixed —- one of the major learnings of the last few months is that harness and eval (“looping” and support / tooling around it) is really critical. I would guess these numbers are the floor.
For instance, some of these tasks include creating videos, and one of the common reported failure mode is truncated videos, or not all videos being created. This sort of failure mode is currently best managed by an outer evaluation loop; no frontier model will, when managed by an eval loop, submit work like this right now.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#507Hijacking popular thread to ask: What are the usage limits now for Codex and Claude? A while back I gave the same task to both, and Codex used 20x less of my 5-hour limit (both on the $20/month plan). (This annoyed me since I tend to prefer Claude, but the limits at the time made it unusable for anything serious.) However, since that time, both providers have massively reduced usage allowances (and at least one of th…
I find the Codex usage super generous (but on the $200 plan, I also have the Claude $200 plan). I can run xhigh with subagents pretty much all my waking hours if I want to. If I turn on speed (1.5x) I will hit the 5 hour limit sometimes. I prefer Claude's vibe over 5.5 but 5.5 seems much less lazy. I'm sure it depends a lot on tasks and prompt strategy though.
I easily burn through 3 $200 plans in less than a week. I am often using 4-6 sessions at once and do run overnight goals though typically 2 at once. Almost never use fast.
Claude plans are more generous now by about 2-3x but Anthropic slowed their tps a month or so ago so you’re not getting the speed. It’s flip flopped, Codex tightened it significantly recently and used to be more generous.
I do split between work, personal and OSS projects, which is why I have the plans.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#508If Claude Mythos and Fable 5 are the same underlying models just with different safeguards, I fail to see how TerminalBench has them at different scores.
Refusals, presumably.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#509Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have no need for Anthropic/OpenAI's frontier model capability, you may be better served with an open-weight model that can't be taken away. Edit: > GPT-5 does the job. I bring up DeepSeek V4 Flash a lot on HN, but I want to mention that according to Artificial Analysis, it trades blows with GPT-5 (high) (from August, 2025) [0] [0]: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/comparisons/deepseek-v4...
We rolled out Deepseek V4 Flash to our customers and it was an absolute disaster, unfortunately. It was not able to follow simple commands, always "forgot" to do things, lied consistently about its work, and so on. It was pretty good though on on-off work, like summarizing something or executing simple commands, so we are experimenting now with using it for subagent work with clear instructions and hand off. Deepseek…
Your experience with DeepSeek v4 Flash differs from mine: while I usually use DeepSeek v4 Pro (that is also inexpensive), I find using DeepSeek v4 Flash with the Fireworks.ai API and properly configured OpenCode to be very good for routine work, and it is pleasantly very fast. Admittedly I use DeepSeek v4 Pro for difficult problems.
I encourage people to at least once a month to do a quick evaluation with their own problems and workflows. Estimate cost as both what inference tokens cost for a task and also how much human effort it takes to get required results.
I disregard benchmarks.
Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model
#510Hijacking popular thread to ask: What are the usage limits now for Codex and Claude? A while back I gave the same task to both, and Codex used 20x less of my 5-hour limit (both on the $20/month plan). (This annoyed me since I tend to prefer Claude, but the limits at the time made it unusable for anything serious.) However, since that time, both providers have massively reduced usage allowances (and at least one of th…
I find the Codex usage super generous (but on the $200 plan, I also have the Claude $200 plan). I can run xhigh with subagents pretty much all my waking hours if I want to. If I turn on speed (1.5x) I will hit the 5 hour limit sometimes. I prefer Claude's vibe over 5.5 but 5.5 seems much less lazy. I'm sure it depends a lot on tasks and prompt strategy though.
This is the correct answer, but GPT-5.5's personality is totally fine. Steipete said best when GPT-5.5 is just German humorless compsci PhD.