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

OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 148 posts

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#121

Post by xrisk »

timfsu wrote: post #114
phil21 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, Codex basically gives me unlimited tokens for my use-case under the Pro plan. Just keep it the same price and keep or increase usage limits and I'm quite happy. This lets me mess around with random experiments as I "catch up" on how to find various (mostly silly) uses for the technology. That and much less worry about being banned without warning for not using approved harnesses as I try random stuff is a giant…

In contrast, I’m on the $200 max plan for Codex and I hit the 5 hour limit near daily at work. I typically am having it work on about 5 tasks an hour. I’ve never hit a 5 hour limit on Claude on the $200 plan but I have hit my weekly limit.

What models?

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#122

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

shostack wrote: post #116
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude also just updated their privacy policy so they can shove a "please verify your identity" reply in your face after they flag your chat for "malicious activity". This is already common practice with Codex.

And how does this compare to openai which is an ad company now? I am interested in trying codex but I want to know how my data will be used for ads or measurement and training data if I become a paid subscriber. And what happens to that data when I stop subscribing?

my comment was not an endorsement of codex. when I said "also" I was referring to openai as the other problematic company :)

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#124

Post by SwellJoe »

ValentineC wrote: post #119
SwellJoe wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally never hit usage limits in Claude Code on the $100 plan, and I feel like I'm using it as heavily as I can while still producing useful software. I could certainly make thinky machine go burr by giving it more busy work, but it wouldn't be good code or code that needs to exist. And, I even use `claude -p` pretty regularly for scripted stuff (automated security vulnerability searches), which I thought was no…

> And, I even use `claude -p` pretty regularly for scripted stuff (automated security vulnerability searches), which I thought was now counted at regular API rates, but that doesn't seem to ever run out either. The billing change starts 15 June: https://zed.dev/blog/anthropic-subscription-changes (Couldn't find a direct Claude link that wasn't a Twitter tweet (what is with AI platforms making announcements on that fE…

Ah, that explains it. I guess I'll see it show up as separate usage pretty soon. Or, I'll find an alternative for that role (though Opus is clearly better than DeepSeek or MiMo or any other cheaper large model I've tried).

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#125

Post by rstuart4133 »

poly2it wrote: post #120
nl wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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://artificialanalysi…

Is there any open model that can emulate the agentic experience you get with Opus 4.7?

GLM 5.1 gets close to 4.6. It can happily run for hours and achieve a result. It given it bugs like a race condition that lead to a count being out by 1 after millions of operations, somewhere in a hundred thousand lines of C code littered with locks and atomic swaps, and it found (as did Opus). Most other models can't.

I'm using Fable now and GLM 5.1 doesn't really compare. But it's literally 1/20 the price. I can't use Fable for coding - it's too expensive. So now we have three levels of models - lightweight ones you dispatch en masse to find things, ones capable of agentic coding tasks that can run for hours like Opus, and GLM (and possibly open source ones - I've only tried a few), and now Fable, which is a truly helpful "architecture buddy". Fable still makes many, many, mistakes, so you have to review every word it writes.

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#126

Post by nl »

selicos wrote: post #115
rented_mule wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CodeWhale (formerly deepseek-tui) automates this over DeepSeek V4 Flash and Pro. My shallow understanding is that it prompts the model to evaluate the complexity of a given task, then decides on Flash vs. Pro at various reasoning levels for that task. This can help with both cost and speed. If other agent platforms don't already do this, I have to imagine they will at some point. I'm retired and can't justify spendin…

This is in the direction of Mixture Of Export (MOE) setups. A trained 'router' sits on top of different expert models and routes work to the best/most efficient model for that task, and integrates the work into a whole to provide to the user. At least, that is what I get from the MOE style. Small and fast experts with a router LLM on top to best use them, then the harness to keep it all together.

> Small and fast experts with a router LLM on top to best use them

A router LLM isn't a MoE.

A MoE is a type of LLM architecture, not lots of different LLMs. They are fundamentally different concepts and it is a fundamental misunderstanding to conflate the two.

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#127

Post by nl »

poly2it wrote: post #120
nl wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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://artificialanalysi…

Is there any open model that can emulate the agentic experience you get with Opus 4.7?

Not yet that I've tried, and I'm pretty systematic about test driving them.

I keep https://sql-benchmark.nicklothian.com/#all-data up-to-date with latest releases and try out most that score 24+.

GPT 5.5+ or Opus 4.6+ are the only things I find useful like this. Notably Gemini isn't useful in this way.

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#129

Post by AtlasBarfed »

sireat wrote: post #96

As long as Codex remains so affordable and useful they do not have to slash prices, just keep Codex usable. I keep meaning to try Claude Code, but I can't seem to run out of limits on Codex on regular pro plan. Meanwhile all my friends on Claude Code are fighting the token limits every few hours. I even switched to using extra high for easy medium level script tasks as a test and besides taking longer there was not m…

Do you know the money these places are burning through?

Re: OpenAI mulls slashing prices as it competes with Anthropic for users

#130

Post by emodendroket »

sigmar wrote: post #100
sireat wrote: post #96

As long as Codex remains so affordable and useful they do not have to slash prices, just keep Codex usable. I keep meaning to try Claude Code, but I can't seem to run out of limits on Codex on regular pro plan. Meanwhile all my friends on Claude Code are fighting the token limits every few hours. I even switched to using extra high for easy medium level script tasks as a test and besides taking longer there was not m…

>As long as Codex remains so affordable and useful they do not have to slash prices, just keep Codex usable. I imagine they track usage and can see whether their habitual users are switching to something else and aren't going to slash prices 'for the hell of it'. just look at public stats on openrouter (obviously not indicative of first party app usage or direct api usage, but there's a huge difference between these…

It sounds like the problem is signing customers in the first place.
Post reply on HN