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

ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

chatgpt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 262 posts

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#51

Post by azuanrb »

patates wrote: post #27

5.4, in my own testing, was almost always ahead of Opus 4.6 for reviews and planning. I'm on plus plan on openai, so I couldn't test it so deeply. Anyone who had more experience on both could perhaps chime in? Pros/cons compared to Opus? I'm invested in Claude ecosystem but the recent quality and session limits decrease have me on the edge.

Same for me. I'm on $20 plan for both and I use them both interchangeably. Similar "intelligence" imo. Just different way of doing things, that's all. But Claude is getting worse in terms of token usage so I've cancelled my plan last month.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#52

Post by alyxya »

irishcoffee wrote: post #43
carbocation wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The $20 Plus plan still exists, and does not give access to the pro model. The $200 Pro plan still exists, and does give access to the pro model. What is new is a $100 Pro plan that does give access to the pro model, with lower usage limits than the $200 Pro plan.

So, reading the tea leaves, they're either losing subscribers for the $200 plan, or they're not following the same hockey stick path of growth they thought they were... maybe? Edit: I wonder if this is actually compute-bound as the impetus

Plenty of people wanted to spend more than $20 but less than $200 for a plan. It's long overdue IMO.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#53

Post by dimmke »

carbocation wrote: post #30
giwook wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to clarify, one does not get access to the pro model on the Pro plan?

The $20 Plus plan still exists, and does not give access to the pro model. The $200 Pro plan still exists, and does give access to the pro model. What is new is a $100 Pro plan that does give access to the pro model, with lower usage limits than the $200 Pro plan.

This is still worse than Anthropic's right? Because you get access to their top model even at the $20 price point

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#54

Post by jgalt212 »

giwook wrote: post #25
jstummbillig wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the "only" thing: You get access to GPT-5.4 pro.

Just to clarify, one does not get access to the pro model on the Pro plan?

You're trying to make words mean what we all think they mean. Stop foisting your Textualism upon us!

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#55

Post by torben-friis »

sassymuffinz wrote: post #39
satvikpendem wrote: post #16

The era of subsidization is over, it seems. For my money, on the code side at least, GitHub Copilot on VSCode is still the most cost effective option, 10 bucks for 300 requests gets me all I need, especially when I use OpenAI models which are counted as 1x vs Opus which is 3x. I've stopped using all other tools like Claude Code etc.

I tried Claude Code for a week straight recently to see what all the hype was about and while it pumped out a bunch of reasonable looking code and features I ended up feeling completely disconnected from my codebase and uncomfortable. Cancelled the plan I had with them and happily went back to just coding like normal in VSCode with occasional dips into Copilot when a need arose or for rubber ducking and planning. Fee…

>Anyone who says they're able to review thousands of lines effectively that Claude might slop out in a day are lying to themselves.

The amount you can review before burning out is now the reasonable limit, for the same reason that a car is supposed to stay at the speed you can handle and not the max speed of the engine.

Of course, many people are secretly skipping reviews and some dare to publicly advocate for getting rid of them entirely.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#56

Post by aerhardt »

selectively wrote: post #2

Price drops are nice. Unfortunately, the quality differential versus the competitor is night and day. And everyone serious uses the API rate billing anyway.

> the quality differential versus the competitor is night and day.

This myth about the inferiority of ChatGPT and Codex is becoming a meme.

I have active subscriptions to both. I am throwing at Codex all kinds of data engineering, web development and machine learning problems, have been working on non-tech tasks in the "Karpathy Obsidian Wiki" [1] style before he posted about it.

Not only does Codex crush Claude on cost, it's also significantly better at adherence and overall quality. Claude is there on my Mac, gathering dust, to the point I am thinking of not renewing the sub.

There are plenty of fellow HNers here who feel the same from what I read in the flamewars. I suspect none of us really has a horse in this race and many are half-competent (in other threads, they mention they do things like embedded programming, distributed DL systems, etc.)

I'm starting to suspect a vast majority of people pushing the narrative that Claude is vastly better haven't even tried the 5.3 / 5.4 models and are doing it out of sheer tribalism.

[1] https://gist.github.com/karpathy/442a6bf555914893e9891c11519...

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#57

Post by Tiberium »

antirez wrote: post #34

Very good move. In my experience, for system programming at least, GPT 5.4 xhigh is vastly superior to Claude Opus 4.6 max effort. I ran many brutal tests, including reconstructing for QEMU the SCSI controller (not longer accessible) of a SVSY UNIX of the early 90s used in a 386. Side by side, always re-mirroring the source trees each time one did a breakthrough in the implementation. Well, GPT 5.4 single handed did…

Thanks for confirming my impressions, it's been like 4 months now that I've arrived at the same conclusions. GPT models are just better at any kind of low-level work: reverse engineering including understanding what the decompiled code/assembly does, renaming that decompiled code (functions/types), any kind of C/C++, way more reliable security research (Opus will find way more, but most will turn out to be false positives). I've had GPT create non-trivial custom decompilers for me for binaries built with specific compilers (it's a much simpler task than what IDA Pro/Ghidra are doing but still complex), and modify existing Java decompilers.

Regarding speed, I don't use xhigh that often, and surprisingly for me GPT 5.4 high is faster than Claude 4.6 Opus high (unless you enable fast mode for Opus).

Of course I still use Opus for frontend, for some small scripts, and for criticizing GPT's code style, especially in Python (getattr).

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#58

Post by operatingthetan »

satvikpendem wrote: post #47
deadbabe wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not over yet. More hikes will come. It will reach $1000.

That's what I said by subsidization being over.

The subsidization being "over" would mean we are paying their actual cost or more.

Re: ChatGPT Pro now starts at $100/month

#59

Post by treesknees »

giwook wrote: post #37
satvikpendem wrote: post #16

The era of subsidization is over, it seems. For my money, on the code side at least, GitHub Copilot on VSCode is still the most cost effective option, 10 bucks for 300 requests gets me all I need, especially when I use OpenAI models which are counted as 1x vs Opus which is 3x. I've stopped using all other tools like Claude Code etc.

I use both GH Copilot as well as CC extensively and it does seem more economical, though I wonder how long this will last as I imagine Github has also been subsidizing LLM usage extensively. FWIW it feels like GH Copilot is a cheaper version of OpenRouter but with trade-offs like being locked into VSCode and the Microsoft ecosystem overall. I already use VSCode though and otherwise I don't see much downside to using…

You’re not locked into vscode. There are plugins for other IDEs, and a ‘copilot’ cli tool very similar to Claude Code’s cli tool.

I also wouldn’t say you’re locked into Microsoft’s ecosystem. At work we just have skills that allow for interaction with Bitbucket and other internal tooling. You’re not forced to use GitHub at all.

Post reply on HN