Live data from Hacker News

GPT-4.5

openai.com

121–130 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4.5

#122
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not a distill of o1, since o1 is a reasoning model and GPT4.5 is not. Also, OpenAI has been claiming that this is a very large model (and it's 2.5x more expensive than even OG GPT-4) so we can assume it's the biggest model they've trained so far. They'll probably distill this one into GPT-4.5-mini or such, and have something faster and cheaper available soon.

There are plenty of distills of reasoning models now, and they said in they livestream they used training data from "smaller models" - which is probably every model ever considering how expensive this one is.

Knowledge distillation is literally by definition teaching a smaller model from a big one, not the opposite.

Generating outputs from existing (therefore smaller) models to train the largest model of all time would simply be called "using synthetic data". These are not the same thing at all.

Also, if you were to distill a reasoning model, the goal would be to get a (smaller) reasoning model because you're teaching your new model to mimic outputs that show a reasoning/thinking trace. E.G. that's what all of those "local" Deepseek models are: small LLama models distilled from the big R1 ; a process which "taught" Llama-7B to show reasoning steps before coming up with a final answer.

Re: GPT-4.5

#123

I'm one week in on heavy grok usage. I didn't think I'd say this, but for personal use, I'm considering cancelling my OpenAI plan. The one thing I wish grok had was more separation of the UI from X itself. The interface being so coupled to X puts me off and makes it feel like a second-hand citizen. I like ChatGPTs minimalist UI.

Theres grok.com which is standalone and with its own UI

Re: GPT-4.5

#124

Seeing OpenAI and Anthropic go different routes here is interesting. It is worth moving past the initial knee jerk reaction of this model being unimpressive and some of the comments about "they spent a massive amount of money and had to ship something for it..." * Anthropic appears to be making a bet that a single paradigm (reasoning) can create a model which is excellent for all use cases. * OpenAI seems to be betti…

> OpenAI seems to be betting that you'll need an ensemble of models with different capabilities, working as a single system, to jump beyond what the reasoning models today can do.

The high level block diagrams for tech always end up converging to those found in biological systems.

Re: GPT-4.5

#125

The GPT-1 response to the example prompt "What was the first language?" got a chuckle out of me

The question being, will we be chuckling at current models responses in 5-10y from now?

Re: GPT-4.5

#126
This feels more like a release they pushed out to keep the "hype" alive rather than something they were eager to share. Honestly, the results don’t seem all that impressive, and considering the price, it just doesn’t feel worth it.

Re: GPT-4.5

#127
post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

I suppose this was their final hurrah after two failed attempts at training GPT-5 with the traditional pre-training paradigm. Just confirms reasoning models are the only way forward.

What it confirms, I think, is, that we are going to need a lot more chips.

Re: GPT-4.5

#128
post #7

A bit better at coding than ChatGPT 4o but not better than o3-mini - there is a chart near the bottom of the page that is easy to overlook: - ChatGPT 4.5 on AWS Bench verified: 38.0% - ChatGPT 4o on AWS Bench verified: 30.7% - OpenAI o3-mini on AWS Bench verified: 61.0% BTW Anthropic Claude 3.7 is better than o3-mini at coding at around 62-70% [1]. This means that I'll stick with Claude 3.7 for the time being for my…

I don't see Claude 3.7 on the official leaderboard. The top performer on the leaderboard right now is o1 with a scaffold (W&B Programmer O1 crosscheck5) at 64.6%: https://www.swebench.com/#verified.

If Claude 3.7 achieves 70.3%, it's quite impressive, it's not far from 71.7% claimed by o3, at (presumably) much, much lower costs.

Re: GPT-4.5

#129
post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

The price really is eye watering. At a glance, my first impression is this is something like Llama 3.1 405B, where the primary value may be realized in generating high quality synthetic data for training rather than direct use. I keep a little google spreadsheet with some charts to help visualize the landscape at a glance in terms of capability/price/throughput, bringing in the various index scores as they become ava…

This is an amazing spreadsheet - thank you for sharing!

Re: GPT-4.5

#130
post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

Now the real question about AI automation starts. Is it cheaper to pay a human to do the task or a AI company?
Post reply on HN