Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.6

openai.com

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.6

#291
post #6

Ok long time Claude Code user here; lately I've started to realize there's other great models out there I should be trying, but I'm hesitant to leave Claude Code behind for something new. What's the consensus today on codex vs claude code, does it really matter anymore?

just try it you will back to codex because gpt is trash, I ask for refund under 7 hours

Re: GPT-5.6

#292
post #284

"We've extended usage of Claude Fable" message incoming any day now.

They reset all usage half an hour ago. It's back to 0% per week and session. No specifically Fable related.

Hahaha seeing this play out in real time is absolutely incredible.

Re: GPT-5.6

#293
post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mythos probably wouldn't, otherwise they'd have included it in their release. Next version of Mythos probably will though. And yeah.. Reality has not been kind to LeCun.

Are you joking? They spend billions of dollars training LLMs to get a 7.8% on arc agi 3 whereas DINO models are near sota in image classification, provide meaningful embeddings to the point where image segmentation is just PCA. The spend on DINO cannot be more than five million (correct me if I'm wrong) JEPA is just getting started

His main anti-LLM predictions have been consistently either wrong or misleading.

There's many ways to skin a cat so you can probably do something with a JEPA approach as well, but I doubt he actually catches up to having agents on the level of where Anthropic/OpenAI will be at any point.

Re: GPT-5.6

#294
post #16

Most importantly, the cost: > GPT‑5.6 is priced per 1M tokens across three model sizes: Sol is $5 input / $30 output; Terra is $2.50 input / $15 output; and Luna is $1 input / $6 output. Just as expensive as Fable 5. But of course, another slot machine upgrade but the costs will keep going up and the open weight models from china will continue to race everyone else to $0. Looking forward to the next version of GLM, Q…

Also watching deepseek closely. Seems like US frontier labs only know how to throw money at things as opposed to actually make smart improvements to the algorithms.

[deleted]

Re: GPT-5.6

#295
post #37

"GPT‑5.6 delivers a step change in design judgment. With only high-level direction, GPT‑5.6 creates tasteful, ergonomic, and functional interfaces. Its stronger computer-use capabilities let it inspect and refine the rendered result—not just generate the underlying code or content—so it can catch visual and functional issues and apply finishing touches before handing the work back." This one is really promising, as i…

+1. I've been only using Sonnet/Opus these days for UI work because GPT 5.5 just can't do any of that. Its just really terrible. Eager to give this one a try.

Re: GPT-5.6

#296
post #260

>> approximately 700,000 A100e GPU hours of black-box automated red teaming Amusing that they use A100e as the reference point to sound impressive. Different ways you could make that conversion, but based on FP4 FLOPs (yes it's disadvantageous to A100, that's the point), that's something like 200hr on a GB300 NVL72 rack. Not nothing either, but far less astounding sounding than 700k hrs.

Wait, what do you mean? 700k A100e hours are equal to 200 hours of a GB300 NVL72 rack? One GB300 NVL72, 72-GPU rack has equal processing power to 3500 A100e GPUs?

maybe? ai says about *8.3 days* of continuous runtime on a single GB300 NVL72 rack

about a sprint's level of effort.

Re: GPT-5.6

#297
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. GPT 5.5 will come up with more straightforward solutions with far fewer tokens than Claude. Also, the usage limits are much more generous for Codex than Claude Code for the same monthly plan.

Last time I used Codex it would make loads of assumptions, often quite big ones, without asking. Did they fix that, as that for me was what actually made codex worse.

I find that I have to tell GPT and Claude to keep asking me questions, or they will just fill in the gaps themselves (wrongly).

Re: GPT-5.6

#298
i'm not happy with how openai is trying to pit 5.6 sol as a cheaper equivalent to fable here

for one thing, they said that on AA, sol is "within one point of fable" at 58.9 vs 59.9 but don't clarify that the latter is with safeguards where ~8% of the tasks got routed to opus

i'm not rooting for either and genuinely think that the token efficiency and cheaper price are important but this sort of thing just feels disingenuous :-/

Re: GPT-5.6

#299

Oh man, I love capitalism spoiling us here. I was just enjoying my extra Fable credits, now I'll switch to using 5.6 this weekend. I was planning to ration my Anthropic credits, I guess now I do not have to. And I was half wondering if exactly this would happen: right when Fable usage credits were starting to kick in for people, OAI swoops in and takes the puck. As much the AI craze is crazy, this play by play part i…

Anthropic just reset all limits, including Fable. Capitalism is spoiling us.

Re: GPT-5.6

#300
post #6

Ok long time Claude Code user here; lately I've started to realize there's other great models out there I should be trying, but I'm hesitant to leave Claude Code behind for something new. What's the consensus today on codex vs claude code, does it really matter anymore?

I'm also a long-time Claude Code user here, though the last 3 weeks I've been doing loops having claude use codex to review until they reach consensus; uses tons of tokens but the result is really good.

I'm trying Codex as my primary the last day or so, because I'm at 98% use and reset in 3 days on Claude. I'm worried about a lot of our skills and CLAUDE.mds and the like getting lost unless I migrate them, but otherwise codex seems to be working great.

Post reply on HN