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

GPT-5.2

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.2

#521

Post by XCSme »

AstroBen wrote: post #515
agentifysh wrote: post #436

Looks like they've begun censoring posts at r/Codex and not allowing complaint threads so here is my honest take: - It is faster which is appreciated but not as fast as Opus 4.5 - I see no changes, very little noticeable improvements over 5.1 - I do not see any value in exchange for +40% in token costs All in all I can't help but feel that OpenAI is facing an existential crisis. Gemini 3 even when its used from AI St…

Did you notice much improvement going from Gemini 2.5 to 3? I didn't I just think they're all struggling to provide real world improvements

Maybe they are just more consistent, which is a bit hard to notice immediately.

Re: GPT-5.2

#522

Post by johndill »

Did Calmmy Sammy that his is the version that will finally cure cancer? The AI shakeout in the AI industry is going to be brutal. Can't see how Private Equity is going to get the little guy to be left holding the giant bag of excrement, but they will figure that out. AI, smart enough to replace you, but not quite smart enough the replace the CEO or Hedge Fund Bros.

Re: GPT-5.2

#523

Post by piskov »

energy123 wrote: post #461
lopuhin wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context window size of 400k is not new, gpt-5, 5.1, 5-mini, etc. have the same. But they do claim they improved long context performance which if true would be great.

But 400k was never usable in ChatGPT Plus/Pro subscriptions. It was nerfed down to 60-100k. If you submitted too long of a prompt they deleted the tokens on the end of your prompt before calling the model. Or if the chat got too long (still below 100k however) they deleted your first messages. This was 3 months ago. Can someone with an active sub check whether we can submit a full 400k prompt (or at least 200k) and t…

Context windows for web

Fast (GPT‑5.2 Instant) Free: 16K Plus / Business: 32K Pro / Enterprise: 128K

Thinking (GPT‑5.2 Thinking) All paid tiers: 196K

https://help.openai.com/en/articles/11909943-gpt-52-in-chatg...

Re: GPT-5.2

#524

Post by byt3bl33d3r »

There’s really no point in looking at benchmarks anymore as real world usage of these models varies between task and prompting strategies. Use your internal benchmarks to evaluate and ignore everything else. It is curious to me how they don’t provide a side x side comparison of other models benchmarks for this release

Re: GPT-5.2

#525

Post by free652 »

radicaldreamer wrote: post #337
solarkraft wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only downsides are in the polish department What an understatement. It has me thinking „man, fuck this“ on the daily. Just today it spontaneously lost an entire 20-30 minutes long thread and it was far from the first time. It basically does it any time you interrupt it in any way. It’s straight up data loss. It’s kind of a typical Google product in that it feels more like a tech demo than a product. It has theoreti…

Google’s standard problem is that they don’t even use their own products. Their Pixel and Android team rocks iPhones on the daily, for example.

You cant buy an iPhone without a director approval. And it's like 3 gen behind as well. So no, they don't use iPhones.

Re: GPT-5.2

#526

Post by redox99 »

whalesalad wrote: post #256
breakingcups wrote: post #43

Is it me, or did it still get at least three placements of components (RAM and PCIe slots, plus it's DisplayPort and not HDMI) in the motherboard image[0] completely wrong? Why would they use that as a promotional image? 0: https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/6lyujQxhZDnOMruN3f...

to be fair that image has the resolution of a flip phone from 2003

It's trivial for a human that knows what a pc looks like. Maybe mistaking displayport for hdmi.

Re: GPT-5.2

#527

Post by boc »

FergusArgyll wrote: post #292
jumploops wrote: post #117

> “a new knowledge cutoff of August 2025” This (and the price increase) points to a new pretrained model under-the-hood. GPT-5.1, in contrast, was allegedly using the same pretraining as GPT-4o.

A new pretrain would definitely get more than a .1 version bump & would get a whole lot more hype I'd think. They're expensive to do!

Maybe the rumors about failed training runs weren't wrong...

Re: GPT-5.2

#528

Post by spwa4 »

luhn wrote: post #423
tenpoundhammer wrote: post #295

I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for curre…

That's hilarious and right on brand for Google that they spend millions developing cutting-edge technology and fumble the ball making a chat app.

Every Google app is a chat app, except maybe search.

Re: GPT-5.2

#529

Post by astrange »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #463
radicaldreamer wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google’s standard problem is that they don’t even use their own products. Their Pixel and Android team rocks iPhones on the daily, for example.

That’s because they will be bullied out of the dating market if they have a “green bubble”.

[flagged]

Re: GPT-5.2

#530

Post by abhaynayar »

tenpoundhammer wrote: post #295

I have been using chatGPT a ton over the last months and paying the subscription. Used it for coding, news, stock analysis, daily problems, and a whatever I could think of. I decided to give Gemini a go when version three came out to great reviews. Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers. This is especially true for situations were searching the web for curre…

Gemini voice recognition is trash compared to chatgpt and that is a deal breaker for me. I wonder how many ppl do OCR versus use voice.

And how has chatgpt lost when ure not comparing the chatgpt that just came out to the Gemini that just came out? Gemini is just annoying to use.

and Google just benchmaxxed I didn't see any significant difference (paying for both) and the same benchmaxxing probably happening for chatgpt now as well, so in terms of core capabilities I feel stuff has plateaued. more bout overall experience now where Gemini suxx.

I really don't get how "search integration" is a "strength"?? can you give any examples of places where you searched for current info and chatgpt was worse? even so I really don't get how it's a moat enough to say chatgpt has lost. would've understood if you said something like tpu versus GPU moat.

Post reply on HN