The marquee feature is obviously the 1M context window, compared to the ~200k other models support with maybe an extra cost for generations beyond >200k tokens. Per the pricing page, there is no additional cost for tokens beyond 200k: https://openai.com/api/pricing/ Also per pricing, GPT-5.4 ($2.50/M input, $15/M output) is much cheaper than Opus 4.6 ($5/M input, $25/M output) and Opus has a penalty for its beta >200…
Yeah, long context vs compaction is always an interesting tradeoff. More information isn't always better for LLMs, as each token adds distraction, cost, and latency. There's no single optimum for all use cases. For Codex, we're making 1M context experimentally available, but we're not making it the default experience for everyone, as from our testing we think that shorter context plus compaction works best for most p…
GPT-5.4
421–430 of 868 posts
Re: GPT-5.4
#422Does anyone know what website is the "Isometric Park Builder" shown off here?
> Theme park simulation game made with GPT‑5.4 from a single lightly specified prompt
GPT literally built that game.
Re: GPT-5.4
#423>Today, we’re releasing GPT‑5.3 Instant >Today, we’re releasing GPT‑5.4 in ChatGPT (as GPT‑5.4 Thinking), >Note that there is not a model named GPT‑5.3 Thinking They held out for eight months without a confusing numbering scheme :)
Re: GPT-5.4
#424What a model mess! OpenAI now has three price points: GPT 5.1, GPT 5.2 and now GPT 5.4. There version numbers jump across different model lines with codex at 5.3, what they now call instant also at 5.3. Anthropic are really the only ones who managed to get this under control: Three models, priced at three different levels. New models are immediately available everywhere. Google essentially only has Preview models! Th…
Re: GPT-5.4
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
But, why include the non-functional chat box in the article?
Different team "manages" the overall blog than the team who wrote that specific article. At one point, maybe it made sense, then something in the product changed, team that manages the blog never tested it again. Or, people just stopped thinking about any sort of UX. These sort of mistakes are all over the place, on literally all web properties, some UX flows just ends with you at a page where nothing works sometimes…
Re: GPT-5.4
#426Re: GPT-5.4
#427I’m sure the military and security services will enjoy it.
Re: GPT-5.4
#428Re: GPT-5.4
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
But, why include the non-functional chat box in the article?
Different team "manages" the overall blog than the team who wrote that specific article. At one point, maybe it made sense, then something in the product changed, team that manages the blog never tested it again. Or, people just stopped thinking about any sort of UX. These sort of mistakes are all over the place, on literally all web properties, some UX flows just ends with you at a page where nothing works sometimes…
Re: GPT-5.4
#430I find it quite funny how this blog post has a big "Ask ChatGPT" box at the bottom. So you might think you could ask a question about the contents of the blog post, so you type the text "summarise this blog post". And it opens a new chat window with the link to the blog post followed by "summarise this blog post". Only to be told "I can't access external URLs directly, but if you can paste the relevant text or descri…