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

OpenAI O3-Mini

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 944 posts

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#271

Post by nullpoint420 »

sho_hn wrote: post #12
sss111 wrote: post #3

So far, it seems like this is the hierarchy o1 > GPT-4o > o3-mini > o1-mini > GPT-4o-mini o3 mini system card: https://cdn.openai.com/o3-mini-system-card.pdf

I think OpenAI really needs to rethink its product naming, especially now that they have a portfolio where there's no such clear hierarchy, but they have a place along different axis (speed, cost, reasoning, capabilities, etc). Your summary attempt e.g. also misses o3-mini vs o3-mini-high. Lots of trade-ofs.

Can't wait for the eventual rename to GPT Core, GPT Plus, GPT Pro, and GPT Pro Max models!

I can see it now:

> Unlock our industry leading reasoning features by upgrading to the GPT 4 Pro Max plan.

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#272

Post by scarface_74 »

This took 1:53 in o3-mini

https://chatgpt.com/share/679d310d-6064-8010-ba78-6bd5ed3360...

The 4o model without using the Python tool

https://chatgpt.com/share/679d32bd-9ba8-8010-8f75-2f26a792e0...

Trying to get accurate results with the paid version of 4o with the Python interpreter.

https://chatgpt.com/share/679d31f3-21d4-8010-9932-7ecadd0b87...

The share link doesn’t show the output for some reason. But it did work correctly. I don’t know whether the ages are correct. I was testing whether it could handle ordering

I have no idea what conclusion I should draw from this besides depending on the use case, 4o may be better with “tools” if you know your domain where you are using it.

Tools are relatively easy to implement with LangChain or the native OpenAI SDK.

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#273

Post by sumedh »

mrbungie wrote: post #254
unsupp0rted wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is definitely intentional. You can like Sama or dislike him, but he knows how to market a product. Maybe this is a bad call on his part, but it is a call.

That's like making a second reading and appealing to authority. The naming is bad. Other people already said it you can "google" stuff, you can "deepseek" something, but to "chatgpt" sounds weird. The model naming is even weirder, like, did they really avoid o2 because of oxigen?

> but to "chatgpt" sounds weird.

People just say it differently, they say "ask chatgpt"

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#274

Post by anon373839 »

GoatInGrey wrote: post #193
buyucu wrote: post #23

why should anyone use this when deepseek is free/cheaper? openai is no longer relevant.

> openai is no longer relevant. I think you've spent a little too long hitting on the Deepseek pipe. Enterprise customers with familiarity with China will avoid the hosted model for data security and IP protection reasons, among others. Those working in any area considered economically competitive with China will also be hesitant to use the vanilla model in self-hosted form as there perpetually remains the standing q…

Perhaps you didn’t realize: Deepseek is an open weights model and you can use it via the inference provider of your choice, or even deploy it on your own hardware - unlike OpenAI’s models. API calls to China are not necessary.

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#275

Post by nejsjsjsbsb »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #7
sss111 wrote: post #3

So far, it seems like this is the hierarchy o1 > GPT-4o > o3-mini > o1-mini > GPT-4o-mini o3 mini system card: https://cdn.openai.com/o3-mini-system-card.pdf

OpenAI needs a new branding scheme.

The Llama folk know how. Good old 90s version scheme.

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#276

Post by withinboredom »

sangnoir wrote: post #234
lesuorac wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't think this is true. OpenAI has no moat because they have nothing unique; they're using mostly other people's (like Transformers) architectures and other companies hardware. Their value-prop (moat) is that they've burnt more money than everybody else. That moat is trivially circumvented by lighting a larger pile of money and less trivially by lighting the pile more efficently. OpenAI isn't the only comp…

> That moat is trivially circumvented by lighting a larger pile of money and less trivially by lighting the pile more efficently. DeepSeek has proven that the latter is possible, which drops a couple of River crossing rocks into the moat.

The fact that I can basically run o1-mini with deepseek:8b, locally, is amazing. Even on battery power, it works acceptably.

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#278

Post by cruffle_duffle »

brookst wrote: post #252
lesuorac wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't think this is true. OpenAI has no moat because they have nothing unique; they're using mostly other people's (like Transformers) architectures and other companies hardware. Their value-prop (moat) is that they've burnt more money than everybody else. That moat is trivially circumvented by lighting a larger pile of money and less trivially by lighting the pile more efficently. OpenAI isn't the only comp…

Brand is a moat

Ask Jeeves and Altavista surely have something to say about that!

Re: OpenAI O3-Mini

#279

Post by mikeInAlaska »

jen729w wrote: post #211

> Testers preferred o3-mini's responses to o1-mini 56% of the time I hope by this they don't mean me, when I'm asked 'which of these two responses do you prefer'. They're both 2,000 words, and I asked a question because I have something to do. I'm not reading them both ; I'm usually just selecting the one that answered first. That prompt is pointless. Perhaps as evidenced by the essentially 50% response rate: it's a…

Maybe we should take both answers, paste them into a new chat and ask for a summary amalgamation of them
Post reply on HN