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

Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 797 posts

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#291

Post by small_model »

jasonjmcghee wrote: post #272
gandreani wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using gpt-5.4-mini in off-peak hours already feels like super-speed to me. That's probably no more than 100-150 tk/s. I can't imagine 750! I've always eyed Cerebras but never had a use for it that would justify paying for the API directly. Although now that I think about it, trying out the API would probably cost less than a subscription for a month...

Try gpt-5.3-codex-spark - it's 1000 TPS and from my experience more capable than 5.4 mini. If you have a subscription it's a different pool of usage.

Used it, very fast but tiny context window and doesn't have good reasoning. (good for quick simple code changes)

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#292

Post by square_usual »

seviu wrote: post #77
jdw64 wrote: post #44

I think GPT writes code the best. How well will it write in version 5.6? It gives me chills. Recently, I went head-to-head with GPT on nearly 2,000 lines of code, and GPT's solution was superior and faster. I even referenced multiple codebases on GitHub while trying, but they were incomparable to GPT. So using GPT brings both fear and excitement. The fear comes from realizing that this level of code is now the averag…

I am on the opposite camp. Open models are starting to perform better. GPT 5.5 keeps on messing things up. On the contrary, pi + glm + DeepSeek… bliss. Fable was a different kind of beast though. Rip.

Every time I use opus these days I go shut up... you are not fable.. Hard to imagine how just three days with it changed how I saw LLM use.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#293

Post by motoboi »

gandreani wrote: post #177

Easily the most interesting part of this announcement is buried in the second to last paragraph: "We're also launching GPT‑5.6 Sol on Cerebras at up to 750 tokens per second in July, bringing frontier intelligence to customers at unprecedented speed. Access will initially be limited to select customers as we expand capacity." 750 tokens/s on a frontier model is going to be extremely interesting. I doubt this new vers…

bean in mind that "GPT‑5.6 Sol on Cerebras at up to 750 tokens per second" not necessarily means the same model (in terms of inference result). It can mean anything like a very quantized model, a different level of model activation per inference etc.

Of course we can trust that wouldn't name the same thing with different levels of intelligence, right? Right?

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#294

Post by hadlock »

HyperL0gi wrote: post #29

Here is a trend I'm noticing: - GPT-5 mini costs $0.25/$2 and will be discontinued in December. - GPT-5.4 mini costs $0.75/$4.5 and is supposed to be the replacement. - GPT-5.4 nano costs $0.2/$1.25 and, while it ranks better in benchmarks than GPT-5 mini, it's not even close when you test it in real scenarios. So you're left being forced to go to GPT 5.4 mini if you use 5 mini today. The same thing is happening here…

Each model release gives an opportunity to reduce the number of old models still on offer, and charge a higher, less-subsidized tier. The trick is to charge a subsidized price that is less than an M3 Ultra, so they continue paying you rent, instead of a one-time fixed cost. So far open models can't compete with Opus 4.5 but as soon as it can, people will be looking at buying devices that can run that model locally.

We are a claude shop but we already bought two mac studios to start migrating less complex but still agentic workflows there. We will break even on those in less than a year.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#295

Post by charcircuit »

win311fwg wrote: post #34
ChrisLTD wrote: post #5

If it's a new generation why isn't it GPT-6?

It does not introduce incompatibilities with earlier 5.x models? Frontier models are at a point now that there will never be a need for another major version bump, aside from those chasing marketing gimmicks. They are smart enough to adapt.

Why would incompatibilities have anything to do with a major version bump?

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#296

Post by esafak »

vatsachak wrote: post #82

All of these LLMs are getting better at being at an LLM But GPT-5.5 is as useful an LLM can be; it has solved lemmas I've thought about for a year, it can implement typed STLCs in Rust when I give it a formal grammar, it can help me analyze Postgres planner dumps. It's great at tasks that have short solutions but - they cannot learn based on a project - their long term planning capabilities are worse than worms - the…

> - their internal representations are disgusting compared to JEPA

You say this based on a theoretical understanding or did you inspect them?

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#297

Post by lossolo »

HPMOR wrote: post #255
lossolo wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is not an ML researcher or engineer, he is a passionate AI enthusiast blogger. He mostly does SVGs and other low effort checks (sometimes with major flaws, as people have pointed out a few times in the HN comments). Properly evaluating the model across all fronts requires a deep understanding of LLMs, how they work, the trade offs behind new architectures and the relevant research papers. It also takes a lot of ti…

He created Django, what do you mean he's not an engineer? Also 'low-effort??' his posts are extremely in-depth, clearly very thought through with a significant amount of time and energy. Additionally he does perform multifaceted checks across LLMs in many of his other blog posts.

> He created Django, what do you mean he's not an engineer?

I specifically said that he is not an ML engineer (emphasis on ML), so I'm not sure what Python web frameworks have to do with anything.

> Also 'low-effort??' his posts are extremely in-depth, clearly very thought through with a significant amount of time and energy

And yes, low effort. Pelican was low effort, his Fable test was low effort, his HN filter etc. Read the discussion in the comments under the Fable test, it's not just my opinion. There was also another example a few months ago. You can search for it, I don't keep track of these things.

I discussed this with him directly after he called himself an "ML expert" in comments.

This is a classic case of the Gell Mann amnesia effect. I read ML papers and work with ML, but to people outside the industry, his writing can look "extremely in-depth" even though it really isn't. People I work with have the same opinion.

> clearly very thought through with a significant amount of time and energy. Additionally he does perform multifaceted checks across LLMs in many of his other blog posts.

I have never seen an article by him about any model that I would describe that way.

And the most revealing sign that he is not an expert is the type of questions he asks and the mistakes he sometimes makes in the comments here. They show why he is not capable of doing any technically in depth evaluation (at least with his current knowledge level).

If you actually want to learn something as a layperson, read articles written by ML PhDs like Sebastian Raschka or watch Stephen from Welch Labs etc. that are directed at general audience.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#298

Post by MangoCoffee »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #149
jdw64 wrote: post #44

I think GPT writes code the best. How well will it write in version 5.6? It gives me chills. Recently, I went head-to-head with GPT on nearly 2,000 lines of code, and GPT's solution was superior and faster. I even referenced multiple codebases on GitHub while trying, but they were incomparable to GPT. So using GPT brings both fear and excitement. The fear comes from realizing that this level of code is now the averag…

I'm suspect on how much of a coding advance it will be. Seems odd that their announcement has zero coding benchmarks, with the closest related thing being terminal bench.

>zero coding benchmarks

"What gets measured gets managed"

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#299

Post by Topfi »

jdw64 wrote: post #44

I think GPT writes code the best. How well will it write in version 5.6? It gives me chills. Recently, I went head-to-head with GPT on nearly 2,000 lines of code, and GPT's solution was superior and faster. I even referenced multiple codebases on GitHub while trying, but they were incomparable to GPT. So using GPT brings both fear and excitement. The fear comes from realizing that this level of code is now the averag…

Purely subjective, but I tend to prefer reading Opus 4.8 output over GPT 5.5 code, even when the latter can have a higher overall ceiling. The former is just a bit more convenient to review.

Re: Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

#300

Post by paxys »

tasuki wrote: post #282
paxys wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the expectations everyone has created GPT-6 has to pretty much be AGI.

What is your definition of AGI that the current LLMs don't fit?

As the old saying goes, I’ll know it when I see it. The current 5.x generation isn’t it.
Post reply on HN