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

OpenAI o3-pro

help.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 209 posts

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#141

Post by asah »

simonw wrote: post #24
browningstreet wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At Techcrunch AI last week, the OpenAI guy started his presentation by acknowledging that OpenAI knows their naming is a problem and they're working on it, but it won't be fixed immediately.

Sam Altman has said the same thing on Twitter a few times. https://x.com/sama/status/1911906570835022319 > how about we fix our model naming by this summer and everyone gets a few more months to make fun of us (which we very much deserve) until then?

How about they ask ChatGPT for help !

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#142

Post by vintagedave »

> Update to o4-mini (June 6, 2025) > We are rolling back an o4-mini snapshot, that we deployed less than a week ago and intended to improve the length of model responses, because our automated monitoring tools detected an increase in content flags.

Does anyone know what it did or returned? I had not seen anything, nor have I read anything, about issues here.

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#143

Post by johnecheck »

boole1854 wrote: post #33
WhitneyLand wrote: post #27

So, we currently have o4-mini and o4-mini-high, which represent medium and high usage of “thinking” or use of reasoning tokens. This announcement adds o3-pro, which pairs with o3 in the same way the o4 models go together. It should be called o3-high, but to align with the $200 pro membership it’s called pro instead. That said o3 is already an incredibly powerful model. I prefer it over the new Anthropic 4 models and…

No, this doesn't seem to be correct, although confusion regarding model names is understandable. o4-mini-high is the label on chatgpt.com for what in the API is called o4-mini with reasoning={"effort": "high"}. Whereas o4-mini on chatgpt.com is the same thing as reasoning={"effort": "medium"} in the API. o3 can also be run via the API with reasoning={"effort": "high"}. o3-pro is different than o3 with high reasoning.…

OpenAI started strong in the naming department (ChatGPT, DALL-E) then fell off so hard since.

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#144

Post by indigo945 »

littlestymaar wrote: post #127
DanMcInerney wrote: post #31

I'm really hoping GPT5 is a larger jump in metrics than the last several releases we've seen like Claude3.5 - Claude4 or o3-mini-high to o3-pro. Although I will preface that with the fact I've been building agents for about a year now and despite the benchmarks only showing slight improvement, I have seen that each new generation feels actively better at exactly the same tasks I gave the previous generation. It would…

> I'm really hoping GPT5 is a larger jump in metrics than the last several releases we've seen like Claude3.5 - Claude4 or o3-mini-high to o3-pro. This kind of expectations explains why there hasn't been a GPT-5 so far, and why we get a dumb numbering scheme instead for no reason. At least Claude eventually decided not to care anymore and release Claude 4 even if the jump from 3.7 isn't particularly spectacular. We'r…

I have tried Claude 4.0 for agentic programming tasks, and it really outperforms Claude 3.7 by quite a bit. I don't follow the benchmarks - I find them a bit pointless - but anecdotally, Claude 4.0 can help me in a lot of situations where 3.7 would just flounder, completely misunderstand the problem and eventually waste more of my time than it saves.

Besides, I do think that Google Gemini 2.0 and its massively increased token memory was another "big leap". And that was released earlier this year, so I see no sign of development slowing down yet.

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#145

Post by torginus »

chad1n wrote: post #28

The guys in the other thread who said that OpenAI might have quantized o3 and that's how they reduced the price might be right. This o3-pro might be the actual o3-preview from the beginning and the o3 might be just a quantized version. I wish someone benchmarks all of these models to check for drops in quality.

I've wondered if some kind of smart pruning is possible during evaluation.

What I mean by that, is if a neuron implements a sigmoid function and its input weights are 10,1,2,3 that means if the first input is active, then evaluation the other ones is mathematically pointless, since it doesn't change the result, which recursively means the inputs of those neurons that contribute to the precursors are pointless as well.

I have no idea how feasible or practical is it to implement such an optimization and full network scale, but I think its interesting to think about

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#147

Post by eru »

I'm trying out o3-pro now with some algorithmic questions. It seems to be doing alright, but it's taking an awfully long time (as expected) and the UIs seem to time out a lot, especially the Android app and the MacOS desktop app. The web interface seems the least flaky, but that's not saying much.

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#148

Post by eru »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #138
mofeien wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain why?

You can write projects with LLMs thanks to tools that can analyze your local project's context, which didn't exist a year ago. You could use Cursor, Windsurf, Q CLI, Claude Code, whatever else with Claude 3 or even an older model and you'd still get usable results. It's not the models which have enabled "vibe coding", it's the tools. An additional proof of that is that the new models focus more and more on coding in…

You need a certain quality of model to make 'vibe coding' work. For example, I think even with the best tooling in the world, you'd be hard pressed to make GPT 2 useful for vibe coding.

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#149

Post by eru »

simonw wrote: post #36
chad1n wrote: post #28

The guys in the other thread who said that OpenAI might have quantized o3 and that's how they reduced the price might be right. This o3-pro might be the actual o3-preview from the beginning and the o3 might be just a quantized version. I wish someone benchmarks all of these models to check for drops in quality.

That's definitely not the case here. The new o3-pro is slow - it took two minutes just to draw me an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle. o3-preview was much faster than that. https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/10/o3-pro/

Well, that might be more of a function of how long they let it 'reason' than anything intrinsic to the model?

Re: OpenAI o3-pro

#150

Post by munksbeer »

motorest wrote: post #93
alightsoul wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what tools did you use?

> what tools did you use? Nothing fancy. Visual Studio Code + Copilot, agent mode, a couple prompt files, and that's it.

Do you mind me asking which language and if you have any esoteric constraints in the apps you build? We use a java in a monorepo, and have a full custom rolled framework on top of which we build our apps. Do you find vibe coding works ok with those sort of constraints, or do you just end up with a generic app?
Post reply on HN