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

ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

chatgpt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 262 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#121

Post by somenameforme »

mrdependable wrote: post #107

It's interesting seeing all the ChatGPT users in this thread, knowing what we know about OpenAI. Either they don't care about what OpenAI does, don't know their reputation, or feel like their use is too insignificant to matter.

I assume in any sort of thread on a topic like this there is going to be inorganic activity. These companies are all fighting rather hard to try to gain marketshare, potentially worth $trillions, with a product fully capable of producing endless reasonably compelling content to populate an account, a website, or any other basic proof of identity one might ever want.

It's probably never been the case that plurality of views meant anything since online is a bubble to begin with, filtered by endless biases wherever we happen to be reading, making it an even more fringe bubble, but the advent of AI has pushed it all over the edge to the point that perceived pluralities are just completely and utterly meaningless. Somewhat depressing for a one who enjoys online chat as a pasttime, but it's the reality of the world now.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#122

Post by taoh »

dyauspitr wrote: post #118
taoh wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does GPT-5.4 pro give a much better result in some circumstances? What're their typical uses in your experience?

If you want it to deeply research something pro is great. I had a problem I just couldn’t find with my oven so I gave it a lot of information and it went off on its own for about 2 hours and then gave me what I needed to fix the problem (fan was turning off too quickly which was causing the panel to overheat). I have no idea how it figured it out and I couldn’t find anything after hours of googling so it was very imp…

Thanks for sharing this experience. Does it cost a lot of token in the deep analysis - which will make the $100 plan much quicker to drain all budgets.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#123

Post by patates »

giwook wrote: post #41
patates wrote: post #27

5.4, in my own testing, was almost always ahead of Opus 4.6 for reviews and planning. I'm on plus plan on openai, so I couldn't test it so deeply. Anyone who had more experience on both could perhaps chime in? Pros/cons compared to Opus? I'm invested in Claude ecosystem but the recent quality and session limits decrease have me on the edge.

Do you mind elaborating on your experience here? Just curious as I've often heard that Claude was superior for planning/architecture work while ChatGPT was superior for actual implementation and finding bugs.

Claude makes more detailed plans that seem better if you just skim them, but when analyzed, has a lot of errors, usually.

It compensates for most during implementation if you make it use TDD by using superpower et al, or just telling it to do so.

GPT 5.4 makes more simple plans (compared to superpowers - a plugin from the official claude plugin marketplace - not the plan mode), but can better fill the details while implementing.

Plan mode in Claude Code got much better in the last months, but the lacking details cannot be compensated by the model during the implementation.

So my workflow has been:

Make claude plan with superpowers:brainstorm, review the spec, make updates, give the spec to gpt, usually to witness grave errors found by gpt, spec gets updates, another manual review, (many iterations later), final spec is written, write the plan, gpt finds mind boggling errors, (many iterations later), claude agent swarm implements, gpt finds even more errors, I find errors, fix fix fix, manual code review and red tests from me, tests get fixed (many iterations later) finally something usable with stylistic issues at most (human opinion)!

This happens with the most complex features that'd be a nightmare to implement even for the most experienced programmers of course. For basic things, most SOTA modals can one-shot anyway.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#124

Post by rs_rs_rs_rs_rs »

mrdependable wrote: post #107

It's interesting seeing all the ChatGPT users in this thread, knowing what we know about OpenAI. Either they don't care about what OpenAI does, don't know their reputation, or feel like their use is too insignificant to matter.

What's with the holier-than-thou attitude? Why do you think you're better than someone using chatgpt?

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#125

Post by postalcoder »

antirez wrote: post #34

Very good move. In my experience, for system programming at least, GPT 5.4 xhigh is vastly superior to Claude Opus 4.6 max effort. I ran many brutal tests, including reconstructing for QEMU the SCSI controller (not longer accessible) of a SVSY UNIX of the early 90s used in a 386. Side by side, always re-mirroring the source trees each time one did a breakthrough in the implementation. Well, GPT 5.4 single handed did…

What I like most about gpt coding models is how predictable of a lever that thinking effort is.

Xhigh will gather all the necessary context. low gathers the minimum necessary context.

That doesn’t work as well with me for Opus. Even at max effort it’ll overlook files necessary to understanding implementations. It’s really annoying when you point that out and you get hit with an”you’re absolutely right”.

Codex isn’t the greatest one shot horse in the race but, once you figure out how to harness it, it’s hard to go back to other models.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#126

Post by rs_rs_rs_rs_rs »

somenameforme wrote: post #121
mrdependable wrote: post #107

It's interesting seeing all the ChatGPT users in this thread, knowing what we know about OpenAI. Either they don't care about what OpenAI does, don't know their reputation, or feel like their use is too insignificant to matter.

I assume in any sort of thread on a topic like this there is going to be inorganic activity. These companies are all fighting rather hard to try to gain marketshare, potentially worth $trillions, with a product fully capable of producing endless reasonably compelling content to populate an account, a website, or any other basic proof of identity one might ever want. It's probably never been the case that plurality of…

Yeah yeah yeah, everyone's a bot expect you with all the right opinions...

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#127

Post by dyauspitr »

taoh wrote: post #122
dyauspitr wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want it to deeply research something pro is great. I had a problem I just couldn’t find with my oven so I gave it a lot of information and it went off on its own for about 2 hours and then gave me what I needed to fix the problem (fan was turning off too quickly which was causing the panel to overheat). I have no idea how it figured it out and I couldn’t find anything after hours of googling so it was very imp…

Thanks for sharing this experience. Does it cost a lot of token in the deep analysis - which will make the $100 plan much quicker to drain all budgets.

I think it’s going to be very hard to blow through your tokens just using chat. I mostly bought the plan so I could use Codex and on the $200 a month plan I’ve basically been using it 15 hours a day almost nonstop and I don’t run out of tokens for the week.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#128

Post by bluegatty »

sassymuffinz wrote: post #39
satvikpendem wrote: post #16

The era of subsidization is over, it seems. For my money, on the code side at least, GitHub Copilot on VSCode is still the most cost effective option, 10 bucks for 300 requests gets me all I need, especially when I use OpenAI models which are counted as 1x vs Opus which is 3x. I've stopped using all other tools like Claude Code etc.

I tried Claude Code for a week straight recently to see what all the hype was about and while it pumped out a bunch of reasonable looking code and features I ended up feeling completely disconnected from my codebase and uncomfortable. Cancelled the plan I had with them and happily went back to just coding like normal in VSCode with occasional dips into Copilot when a need arose or for rubber ducking and planning. Fee…

I don't like calling a posture 'ignorant' , but I think that's what we have here. I don't mean that as an insult.

It's likely you didn't learn how to use the tool properly, and I'd suggest 'trying again' because not using AI soon will be tantamount to digging holes with shovels instead of using construction equipment. Yes, we still need our 'core skill's but, we're not going to be able to live without the leverage of AI.

Yes - AI can generate slop, and probably too many Engineers do that.

Yes - you can 'feel a loss of control' but that's where you have to find your comfort zone.

It's generally a bad idea to produce 'huge amounts of code' - unless it's perfectly consistent with a design, and he architecture is derived from well-known conventions.

Start by using it as an 'assistant' aka research, fill in all the extra bits, and get your testing going.

You'll probably want to guide the architecture, and at least keep an eye on the test code.

Then it's a matter of how much further 'up' you can go,

There are few situations in which we should be 'accepting' large amounts of code, but some of it can be reviewed quickly.

The AI, already now in 2026 can write better code than you at the algorithmic level - it will be tight, clean, 'by the book' and far lesss likley to have erros.

It fails at the architectural and modular level still, that will probably change.

The AI 'makes a clean cut' in the wood, tighter to the line than any carpenter could - like a power tool.

A carpenter that does not use power tools is an 'artisnal craft person' , not really building functional things.

This is the era of motor cars, there is really no option - I don't say that because I'm pro or anti anything, AI is often way over-hyped - that's something else entirely.

It's like the web / cloud etc. it's just 'imminent'.

So try again, experiment, stay open minded.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#129

Post by bossyTeacher »

dude250711 wrote: post #119
bossyTeacher wrote: post #95

It really feels like LLMs will mostly become tools for tech workers rather than the kind of civilization-level transformation sama has been peddling. Every single comment here seems to confirm the above.

I have heard a CTO had a major success building a side project over a weekend.

Is that CTO in the room with us?

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#130

Post by lo_zamoyski »

fcarraldo wrote: post #110
mediaman wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's surprising to me how much LLM "personality" seems to matter to people, more than actual capability. I do turn to Anthropic for ideation and non-tech things. But I find little reason to use it over codex for engineering tasks. Sometimes for planning, but even there, 5.4 is more critical of my questionable ideas, and will often come up with simpler ways to do things (especially when prompted), which I appreciate.…

> It's surprising to me how much LLM "personality" seems to matter to people, more than actual capability. > I do turn to Anthropic for ideation and non-tech things. But I find little reason to use it over codex for engineering tasks. Sometimes for planning, but even there, 5.4 is more critical of my questionable ideas, and will often come up with simpler ways to do things (especially when prompted), which I apprecia…

Not necessarily. Criticism is the analysis, evaluation, or judgment of the qualities of something. This is a matter of intellectual act. However, you could say that being habitually critical can be partly a result of "personality" or temperament.

(Of course, strictly speaking, LLMs have neither temperament, "personality", nor intellect, but we understand these terms are used in an analogical or figurative fashion.)

Post reply on HN