Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Grok 4.5

x.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

Re: Grok 4.5

#851

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #78
Tiberium wrote: post #5

It seems to be extremely economical - 4x better reasoning efficiency compared to Opus while being priced at $2/$6. For comparison, GPT 5.4 is $2.5/$15, GPT 5.5/5.6 are $5/$30, Opus 4.8 is $5/$25, Fable is $10/$50. And by benchmarks (unless they gamed them), seems to be at around Opus 4.7 level, which is what Elon mentioned in https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2074911038286295049 . I guess the Cursor data was very useful.

The $2/6 pricing seems to only apply for context under 200K. Above that (max context is 500K) pricing doubles to $4/12. https://docs.x.ai/developers/models/grok-4.5

Just to add context (no pun intended), OpenAI also charge differently based on context usage with GPT 5.5 being $5/30 below 200K, and $10/45 above.

Anthropic have a fixed price regardless of context usage.

These per-token pricing schemes aren't directly comparable though since these models all use different numbers of tokens, even for input (Anthropic's recent tokenizer change generates 30% more tokens for exact same input), as well as for reasoning, and context/token usage also varies wildly by harness with Claude Code using 3x the context/tokens of Pi.

Re: Grok 4.5

#852

Post by jph00 »

It takes a lot of digging to find their cache pricing - it's $0.50, which is unusually expensive.

The vast majority of input tokens are normally cached, so this is actually the price that matters. I wonder why it's so high.

Re: Grok 4.5

#853

Post by jiocrag »

highmastdon wrote: post #832
zactato wrote: post #325

I am amazed at people's willingness to use Grok. The company is so transparently morally bankrupt. They're the only AI company that seems okay with CSAM (or at least don't do as much to stop it) Why give them money? It would be one thing if they were the only game in town but thats definitely not the case.

1. intelligence to token-use ratio is much better than the frontier models 2. hallucination rate is MUCH lower than OpenAI, Google and Deepseek models 3. the cost for output tokens is much lower than Anthropic models while near same intelligence and task completion 4. task completion time and success is on par with Opus 4.8 Max, but 3.5x less time used Especially 2. you're probably more willing to allow OpenAI to ban…

You’re joking, right? The model that says Elon Musk could beat LeBron James in a 1 on 1 isn’t biased?

Re: Grok 4.5

#854

Post by dezsiszabi »

benjamoon wrote: post #662

So depressing to read the non-stop political comments here. I’m using GLM at the moment, it’s Chinese and backed by god knows who, and no one cares. I really wanted to see what the experts thought of new Grok tech and how the model compares etc. I wish I could turn off the non-technical comments somehow, could literally just go to reddit if I want to see garbage like this. Am I supposed to get emotional every time I…

There are more to life than nerd shit.

Re: Grok 4.5

#855

Post by 40four »

jesse_dot_id wrote: post #291

I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend?

I don’t disagree with what you said, but that same logic applies to every frontier model, or even lower tier models. You are subject to their creators bias whether you like it or not.

So what you are really saying is that you don’t accept SpaceXAI’s bias, and you’ll plant your flag elsewhere. It’s not that the other camps don’t have their own bias.

Re: Grok 4.5

#856

Post by bognition »

maxdo wrote: post #847
inkysigma wrote: post #719

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the distinction with the Chinese models (or with any of the other models) is that they aren't particularly vocal and obviously active about their politics. I don't see how political commentary about Musk's is somehow forbidden when the man constantly reminds everyone about his political position and is simultaneously the face of his companies and obvious beneficiary. Furthermore, he's also very obviously inte…

They are not vocal because any political activism is not encouraged in China . Check jack ma story . But the message is extremely obvious. They already offer the technical capabilities for digital dictatorship. They offer to counties like Russia tools for big firewall , surveillance with llm. So yes , if you pay money to China you directly sponsor putting people in jail for online activities in China , Russia , North…

By the same logic if you pay money to United States based companies (FAANG) you're directly funding genocide, mass incarceration of people of color, the undermining of digital privacy, and a techo-fascist regime.

Re: Grok 4.5

#857

Post by everfrustrated »

wonderwonder wrote: post #587

Reading through these threads is cursed. This site supposedly attracts the brightest of us but its all just a bunch of people ignoring the article and screaming that Musk is evil so everything he does must be ignored and villified. Just really dissapointing hysteria on display here.

It's so depressing how many comments here are just people reacting to words ... Just like they were a small LLM trained to associate "Elon" with words like "Nazi".

HN really needs a better way to surface comments based on value rather than just votes which have become increasingly tribal affiliation driven like Reddit.

Re: Grok 4.5

#859

Post by segmondy »

rdbl27 wrote: post #457
jesse_dot_id wrote: post #291

I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend?

Has it occurred to you that _all_ model providers are actively trying to shape their models' replies to fit their preferred political narratives?

False, most are just throwing in data into the pipeline and hoping something very smart comes out the other end. Their shaping is to have it code very well, beat all the benchmarks and be safe enough that the powers that be don't and public sentiment doesn't turn against them.

Re: Grok 4.5

#860

Post by neya »

benjamoon wrote: post #662

So depressing to read the non-stop political comments here. I’m using GLM at the moment, it’s Chinese and backed by god knows who, and no one cares. I really wanted to see what the experts thought of new Grok tech and how the model compares etc. I wish I could turn off the non-technical comments somehow, could literally just go to reddit if I want to see garbage like this. Am I supposed to get emotional every time I…

I've been on HN since 2012-ish, but a reader since way before. In the last 5 years alone, HN has unfortunately become extremely political, steering most conversations in the direction of political correctness rather than technical objectivity. I don't think it's a problem of moderation, because, that is still quite good. I think it's just the evolution of forums in general. Invariably, someone will start with FUD or ragebait and every discussion that follows will be trying to address that instead of the technicality behind the topic. Partly, we are also to blame - a lot of the top stories on HN these days have nothing to do with technology to be honest. You'll find the most random stuff on the HN sometimes - "Why geese mate for life" or something similar that makes you wonder "what the fuck am I supposed to do with that information now?"
Post reply on HN