Grok! LOL! Seriously, what's going on there ? Why is it so different from others? Is it just behind technologically/training wise or it's using something fundamentally different?
the starry night one is soo funny
"Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
31–40 of 110 posts
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#32The difference in cost is pretty incredible.
Rather the difference of cost of Claude is pretty incredible. Then again, I guess they gotta make it rain while they can.
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#33Grok! LOL! Seriously, what's going on there ? Why is it so different from others? Is it just behind technologically/training wise or it's using something fundamentally different?
Grok 4.5 is...something else. It performs much better than composer2.5 (while being as fast). It's not Opus, but I think it's not that far off. Definitely better than sonnet for what I've been doing. On the other hand, I think they probably heavily adapted the training data so that it really is extremely focused on code. I just recently ran my personal "poetry benchmark" on it (where I give it ~850 poems I've written…
"You can't QoS that" sounds like the title of a nerdcore rap song.
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#34Why include Grok when it is clearly not even in the same category as the other three?
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#35[deleted]
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#36I wonder how much better a harness could get for drawing
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#37Article is AI-written.
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#38Now add Deepseek, GLM and Kimi :-)
I just tried with Deepseek and got this for the Mona Lisa
.-""-.
/ \
| _ _ |
| (o)(o) |
\ /\ /
| -- |
| \/ |
| |
/ -- \
/ / \ \
/ / \ \
(__/ \__)
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#39GPT-5.6 Sol is the knock out here. Some of those results are really human/charming.
The rectangular smudge tool is a weird tool in the first place, but it's cute to see the models try to use it.
Re: "Drawing" the Mona Lisa with GPT-5.6, Claude, Gemini, and Grok
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Grok 4.5 is...something else. It performs much better than composer2.5 (while being as fast). It's not Opus, but I think it's not that far off. Definitely better than sonnet for what I've been doing. On the other hand, I think they probably heavily adapted the training data so that it really is extremely focused on code. I just recently ran my personal "poetry benchmark" on it (where I give it ~850 poems I've written…
"You can't QoS that" sounds like the title of a nerdcore rap song.
Some of my poetry has clear IT jargon, but it's a very small portion of it (For some reason, OpenAI models, Gemini (and apparently Grok too), love to latch onto this and obsess over this idea that it's "programming poetry" or "poetry for the IT crowd". Often OpenAI and Gemini try to write the "equations of my poetry" (granted, I do write about a cyclical relationship between thinking, feeling and writing a lot, and I do have ONE poem which ends with a Q.E.D.).
I'm giving this context to say that it is very bizarre. It's as if they latch onto it and act as if it's a core or highly distinguished part of the poetry, when it really isn't. Anthropic models, on the other hand, absolutely do not do this, and have never done it.
I really don't understand why this happens. Maybe it's because it has a lot of portuguese, I don't know. And even though the "QoS" is clearly the wrong token being generated, I have had situations where gemini spoke of some phase of my poetry as the "Q&A part" (really, no joke...)
In any case, it's why it's my personal benchmark after all :D