Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.2

openai.com

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.2

#671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemini 3 Pro Preview also got more expensive than 2.5 Pro. 2.5 Pro: $1.25 input, $10 output (million tokens) 3 Pro Preview: $2 input, $12 output (million tokens)

Literally no difference in productivity from a free/ $1.00+ per mm output are literal scams. No added value to the world.

5.1 Pro is great

Re: GPT-5.2

#672

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...

General purpose LLMs aren't very good with generating bounding boxes, so with that context, this is actually seen as decent performance for certain use cases.

Re: GPT-5.2

#673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I generate fun images for my kids - turn photos into a new style, create colouring pages from pictures, etc. I lost interest in chatGPT because it throws vague TOS errors constantly. Gemini handles all of this without complaint.

You feed ai slop to your children? That doesn't seem unhealthy and bad for their development?

Customized, self-guided, tailor made kids content isn’t slop per se.

Colouring pages autogenerated for small kids is about as dangerous as the crayons involved.

Not slop, not unhealthy, not bad.

Re: GPT-5.2

#674

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 is good at reading bad handwriting you say? Might need to give it a shot at my 10 years of journals

Re: GPT-5.2

#675

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…

it's true that Gemini-3 pro is very good, I recently used it on deepwalker [0]. Its agentic performance is amazing. Much better than 5.1

[0]: https://deepwalker.xyz

Re: GPT-5.2

#676

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…

What?? Am I using the same gemini as everyone else?

>OCR is phenomenal

I literally tried to OCR a TYPED document in Gemini today and it mangled it so bad I just transcribed it myself because it would take less time than futzing around with gemini.

> Gemini handles every single one of my uses cases much better and consistently gives better answers.

>coding

I asked it to update a script by removing some redundant logic yesterday. Instead of removing it it just put == all over the place essentially negating but leaving all the code and also removing the actual output.

>Stocks analysis

lol, now I know where my money comes from.

Re: GPT-5.2

#677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. GPT-4.5 was a new pretrain on top of a sizeable raw model scale bump, and only got 0.5 - because the gains from reasoning training in o-series overshadowed GPT-4.5's natural advantage over GPT-4. OpenAI might have learned not to overhype. They already shipped GPT-5 - which was only an incremental upgrade over o3, and was received poorly, with this being a part of the reason why.

I jumped straight from 4o (free user) into GPT-5 (paid user). It was a generational leap if there ever has been one. Much bigger than 3.5 to 4.

What kind of improvements do you expect when going from 5 straight to 6?

Re: GPT-5.2

#678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Due to the "Code Red" threat from Gemini 3, I suspect they'll hold off throttling for longer than usual (by incinerating even more investor capital than usual). Jump in and soak up that extra-discounted compute while the getting is good, kids! Personally, I recently retired so I just occasionally mess around with LLMs for casual hobby projects, so I've only ever used the free tier of all the providers. Having lived t…

I've been using tools like ProxLLM which just slam these AI models via proxy everytime a free tier limit is hit and it works great.

can you provide a link to this tool, a search for proxllm didn't seem to find anything related.

Re: GPT-5.2

#679

I feel there is a point when all these benchmarks are meaningless. What I care about beyond decent performance is the user experience. There I have grudges with every single platform and the one thing keeping me as a paid ChatGPT subscriber is the ability to sort chats in "projects" with associated files (hello Google, please wake up to basic user-friendly organisation!) But all of them * Lie far too often with confi…

There's a leaderboard that measures user experience, the "lmsys" Chatbot Arena Leaderboard ( https://huggingface.co/spaces/lmarena-ai/lmarena-leaderboard ). Main issue with it these days are that it kinda measures sycophancy and user preferred tone more than substance.

Some issues you mentioned like length of response might be user preference. Other issues like "hallucination" are areas of active research (and there are benchmarks for these).

Re: GPT-5.2

#680

I suppose this is as good a place as any to mention this. I've now met two different devs who complained about the weird responses from their LLM of choice, and it turned out they were using a single session for everything. From recipes for the night, presents for the wife and then into programming issues the next day. Don't do that. The whole context is sent on queries to the LLM, so start a new chat for each topic.…

That is interesting. I already knew about that idea that you’re not supposed to let the conversation drag on too much because its problem solving performance might take a big hit, but then it kind of makes me think that over time, people got away with still using a single conversation for many different topics because of the big context windows.

Now I kind of wonder if I’m missing out by not continuing the conversation too much, or by not trying to use memory features.

Post reply on HN