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

GPT-4.5

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-4.5

#391

Post by greenchair »

esafak wrote: post #339
jodrellblank wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Early testing shows that interacting with GPT‑4.5 feels more natural. Its broader knowledge base, improved ability to follow user intent, and greater “EQ” make it useful for tasks like improving writing, programming, and solving practical problems. We also expect it to hallucinate less." "Early testing doesn't show that it hallucinates less, but we expect that putting that sentence nearby will lead you to draw a c…

GPT-4.5 may be an awesome model, some say!

my uncle who works at nintendo said it is a great product.

Re: GPT-4.5

#392

Post by isk517 »

zaptrem wrote: post #26

GPT 4.5 pricing is insane: Price Input: $75.00 / 1M tokens Cached input: $37.50 / 1M tokens Output: $150.00 / 1M tokens GPT 4o pricing for comparison: Price Input: $2.50 / 1M tokens Cached input: $1.25 / 1M tokens Output: $10.00 / 1M tokens It sounds like it's so expensive and the difference in usefulness is so lacking(?) they're not even gonna keep serving it in the API for long: > GPT‑4.5 is a very large and comput…

30x price bump feels like a attempt to pull in as much money as possible before the bubble bursts.

Re: GPT-4.5

#394

Post by planetafro »

nyarlathotep_ wrote: post #324
ur-whale wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI as it stands in 2025 is an amazing technology, but it is not a product at all . As a result, OpenAI simply does not have a business model, even if they are trying to convince the world that they do. My bet is that they're currently burning through other people's capital at an amazing rate, but that they are light-years from profitability They are also being chased by fierce competition and OpenSource which is very…

> AI as it stands in 2025 is an amazing technology, but it is not a product at all. Here I'm assuming "AI" to mean what's broadly called Generative AI (LLMs, photo, video generation) I genuinely am struggling to see what the product is too. The code assistant use cases are really impressive across the board (and I'm someone who was vocally against them less than a year ago), and I pay for Github CoPilot (for now) but…

I think search and chat are decent products as well. I am a Google subscriber and I just use Gemini as a replacement for search without ads. To me, this movement accelerated paid search in an unexpected way. I know the detractors will cry "hallucinations" and the ilk. I would counter with an argument about the state of the current web besieged by ads and misinformation. If people carry a reasonable amount of skepticism in all things, this is a fine use case. Trust but verify.

I do worry about model poisoning with fake truths but dont feel we are there yet.

Re: GPT-4.5

#395

Post by azinman2 »

djhworld wrote: post #369
simonw wrote: post #342

I got gpt-4.5-preview to summarize this discussion thread so far (at 324 comments): hn-summary.sh 43197872 -m gpt-4.5-preview Using this script: https://til.simonwillison.net/llms/claude-hacker-news-themes... Here's the result: https://gist.github.com/simonw/5e9f5e94ac8840f698c280293d399... It took 25797 input tokens and 1225 input tokens, for a total cost (calculated using https://tools.simonwillison.net/llm-prices…

interesting summary but it's hard to gauge whether this is better/worse than just piping the contents into a much cheaper model.

It’d be great if someone would do that with the same data and prompt to other models.

I did like the formatting and attributions but didn’t necessarily want attributions like that for every section. I’m also not sure if it’s fully matching what I’m seeing in the thread but maybe the data I’m seeing is just newer.

Re: GPT-4.5

#396

Post by torginus »

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but this, combined with the extremely embarassing way Claude is playing Pokemon, makes me feel this is an effort by AI companies to make LLMs look bad - setting up the hype cycle for the next thing they have in the pipeline.

Re: GPT-4.5

#397

Post by azinman2 »

philomath_mn wrote: post #348
rl3 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. It is very very slow, ... below took 7s to generate with 4o, but 46s with GPT4.5 This is positively luxurious by o1-pro standards which I'd say average 5 minutes. That said I totally agree even ~45s isn't viable for real-time interactions. I'm sure it'll be optimized. Of course, my comparing it to the highest-end CoT model in [publicly-known] existence isn't entirely fair since they're sort of apples and oranges…

I paid for pro to try `o1-pro` and I can't seem to find any use case to justify the insane inference time. `o3-mini-high` seems to do just as well in seconds vs. minutes.

What are you doing with it? For me deep research tasks are where 5 minutes is fine, or something really hard that would take me way more time myself.

Re: GPT-4.5

#398

Post by immibis »

tmaly wrote: post #73
sebastiennight wrote: post #37

It is interesting that they are focusing a large part of this release on the model having a higher "EQ" (Emotional Quotient). We're far from the days of "this is not a person, we do not want to make it addictive" and getting a firm foot on the territory of "here's your new AI friend". This is very visible in the example comparing 4o with 4.5 when the user is complaining about failing a test, where 4o's response is wh…

I would like to see a humor test. So far, I have not seen any model response that has made me laugh.

ChatGPT gave me this shell script: https://social.immibis.com/media/7102ac83cf4a200e48dd368938e... (obviously, don't download and execute a random shell script from the internet without reading it first)

I think reading it will make you laugh.

Re: GPT-4.5

#399

Post by princealiiiii »

kristianp wrote: post #373
jampa wrote: post #167

First impression of GPT-4.5: 1. It is very very slow, for some applications where you want real time interactions is just not viable, the text attached below took 7s to generate with 4o, but 46s with GPT4.5 2. The style it writes is way better: it keeps the tone you ask and makes better improvements on the flow. One of my biggest complaints with 4o is that you want for your content to be more casual and accessible bu…

How do the two versions match so closely? They have the same content in each paragraph, just worded slightly differently. I wouldn't expect them to write paragraphs that match in size and position like that.

Honestly, feels like a second LLM just reworded the response on the left-side to generate the right-side response.

Re: GPT-4.5

#400

Post by nyc_data_geek1 »

rsynnott wrote: post #300
crazygringo wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We don't really know what this is good for Oh come on. Think how long of a gap there was between the first microcomputer and VisiCalc. Or between the start of the internet and social networking. First of all, it's going to take us 10 years to figure out how to use LLM's to their full productive potential. And second of all, it's going to take us collectively a long time to also figure out how much accuracy is neces…

Arguably social networking is older than the internet proper; USENET predates TCP/IP (though not ARPANet).

Fair enough. I took the phrasing to mean social networking as it exists today in the form of prominent, commercial social media. That may not have been the intent.
Post reply on HN