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

GPT-5.2

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.2

#251

Post by capitainenemo »

Donald wrote: post #243
zone411 wrote: post #222

I've benchmarked it on the Extended NYT Connections benchmark ( https://github.com/lechmazur/nyt-connections/ ): The high-reasoning version of GPT-5.2 improves on GPT-5.1: 69.9 → 77.9. The medium-reasoning version also improves: 62.7 → 72.1. The no-reasoning version also improves: 22.1 → 27.5. Gemini 3 Pro and Grok 4.1 Fast Reasoning still score higher.

Gemini 3 Pro Preview gets 96.8% on the same benchmark? That's impressive

And performs very well on the latest 100 puzzles too, so isn't just learning the data set (unless I guess they routinely index this repo).

I wonder how well AIs would do at bracket city. I tried gemini on it and was underwhelmed. It made a lot of terrible connections and often bled data from one level into the next.

Re: GPT-5.2

#252

Post by hi_im_vijay »

sosodev wrote: post #73
FrasiertheLion wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try elevenlabs

Does elevenlabs have a real-time conversational voice model? It seems like like their focus is largely on text to speech and speech to text. Which can approximate that type of thing but it's not at all the same as the native voice to voice that 4o does.

[disclaimer, i work at elevenlabs] we specifically went with a cascading model for our agents platform because it's better suited for enterprise use cases where they have full control over the brain and can bring their own llm. with that said, even with a cascading model, we can capture a decent amount of nuance with our asr model, and it also supports capturing audio events like laughter or coughing.

a true speech to speech conversational model will perform better on things like capturing tone, pronouncations, phonetics, etc, but i do believe we'll also get better at that on the asr side over time.

Re: GPT-5.2

#253

Post by tedsanders »

iamdanieljohns wrote: post #212
tedsanders wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, the point we wanted to make here is that GPT-5.2's vision is better, not perfect. Cherrypicking a perfect output would actually mislead readers, and that wasn't our intent.

Is Adaptive Reasoning gone from GPT-5.2? It was a big part of the release of 5.1 and Codex-Max. Really felt like the future.

Yes, GPT-5.2 still has adaptive reasoning - we just didn't call it out by name this time. Like 5.1 and codex-max, it should do a better job at answering quickly on easy queries and taking its time on harder queries.

Re: GPT-5.2

#255

Post by whimsicalism »

zug_zug wrote: post #31

For me the last remaining killer feature of ChatGPT is the quality of the voice chat. Do any of the competitors have something like that?

gemini does, grok does, nobody else does (except alibaba but it’s not there yet)

Re: GPT-5.2

#256

Post by whalesalad »

breakingcups wrote: post #43

Is it me, or did it still get at least three placements of components (RAM and PCIe slots, plus it's DisplayPort and not HDMI) in the motherboard image[0] completely wrong? Why would they use that as a promotional image? 0: https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/6lyujQxhZDnOMruN3f...

to be fair that image has the resolution of a flip phone from 2003

Re: GPT-5.2

#257

Post by imiric »

ACCount37 wrote: post #202
dinobones wrote: post #171

It's becoming challenging to really evaluate models. The amount of intelligence that you can display within a single prompt, the riddles, the puzzles, they've all been solved or are mostly trivial to reasoners. Now you have to drive a model for a few days to really get a decent understanding of how good it really is. In my experience, while Sonnet/Opus may not have always been leading on benchmarks, they have always…

The good old "benchmarks just keep saturating" problem. Anthropic is genuinely one of the top companies in the field, and for a reason. Opus consistently punches above its weight, and this is only in part due to the lack of OpenAI's atrocious personality tuning. Yes, the next stop for AI is: increasing task length horizon, improving agentic behavior. The "raw general intelligence" component in bleeding edge LLMs is f…

Shouldn't the next stop be to improve general accuracy, which is what these tools have struggled with since their inception? Until when are "AI" companies going to offload the responsibility on the user to verify the output of their tools?

Optimizing for benchmark scores, which are highly gamed to begin with, by throwing more resources at this problem is exceedingly tiring. Surely they must've noticed the performance plateau and diminishing returns of this approach by now, yet every new announcement is the same.

Re: GPT-5.2

#258

Post by jstummbillig »

So, right off the bat: 5.2 code talk (through codex) feels really nice. The first coding attempt was a little meh compared to 5.1 codex max (reflecting what they wrote themselves), but simply planning / discussing things felt markedly better than anything I remember from any previous model, from any company.

I remain excited about new models. It's like finding my coworker be 10% smarter every other week.

Re: GPT-5.2

#259

Post by tedsanders »

arscan wrote: post #198
tedsanders wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, the point we wanted to make here is that GPT-5.2's vision is better, not perfect. Cherrypicking a perfect output would actually mislead readers, and that wasn't our intent.

I think you may have inadvertently misled readers in a different way. I feel misled after not catching the errors myself, assuming it was broadly correct, and then coming across this observation here. Might be worth mentioning this is better but still inaccurate. Just a bit of feedback, I appreciate you are willing to show non-cherry-picked examples and are engaging with this question here. Edit: As mentioned by @ted…

Thanks for the feedback - I agree our text doesn't make the models' mistakes clear enough. I'll make some small edits now, though it might take a few minutes to appear.

Re: GPT-5.2

#260

Post by iwontberude »

I have already cancelled. Claude is more than enough for me. I don’t see any point in splitting hairs. They are all going to keep lying more and more sneakily.
Post reply on HN