GPT-5.2 • Hacker News Board

Re: GPT-5.2

#681

Post by nrds » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:18 AM UTC

SubiculumCode wrote: post #586

onraglanroad wrote: post #333

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.…

I constantly switch out, even when it's on the same topic. It starts forming its own 'beliefs and assumptions', gets myopic. I also make use of the big three services in turn to attack ideas from multiple directions

> beliefs and assumptions

Unfortunately during coding I have found many LLMs like to encode their beliefs and assumptions into comments; and even when they don't, they're unavoidably feeding them into the code. Then future sessions pick up on these.

Re: GPT-5.2

#682

Post by lend000 » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:25 AM UTC

It seems like they fixed the most obvious issue with the last release, where codex would just refuse to do its job... if it seemed difficult or context usage was getting above 60% or so. Good job on the post-training improvements.

The benchmark changes are incredible, but I have yet to notice a difference in my codebases as of yet.

Re: GPT-5.2

#683

Post by lazarus01 » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:28 AM UTC

My god, what terrible marketing, totally written by AI. No flow whatsoever.

I use Gemini 3 with my $10/month copilot subscription on vscode. I have to say, Gemini 3 is great. I can do the work of four people. I usually run out of premium tokens in a week. But I’m actually glad there is a limit or I would never stop working. I was a skeptic, but it seems like there is a wider variety of patterns in the training distribution.

Re: GPT-5.2

#684

Post by Suppafly » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:32 AM UTC

mmaunder wrote: post #405

Weirdly, the blog announcement completely omits the actual new context window size which is 400,000: https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/gpt-5.2 Can I just say !!!!!!!! Hell yeah! Blog post indicates it's also much better at using the full context. Congrats OpenAI team. Huge day for you folks!! Started on Claude Code and like many of you, had that omg CC moment we all had. Then got greedy. Switched over to Codex…

>Can I just say !!!!!!!! Hell yeah!

...

>THANK YOU!!

Man you're way too excited.

Re: GPT-5.2

#685

Post by namesbc » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:39 AM UTC

So the rosy biased estimate is OpenAI is saving 1 hour of work per day, so 5 hours total per-work week and 20 hours total per-month.

With a subsidized cost of $200/month for OpenAI it would be cheaper to hirer a part-time minimum wage worker than it would be to contract with OpenAI.

And that is the rosiest estimate OpenAI has.

Re: GPT-5.2

#686

Post by dangoodmanUT » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:40 AM UTC

namesbc wrote: post #685

So the rosy biased estimate is OpenAI is saving 1 hour of work per day, so 5 hours total per-work week and 20 hours total per-month. With a subsidized cost of $200/month for OpenAI it would be cheaper to hirer a part-time minimum wage worker than it would be to contract with OpenAI. And that is the rosiest estimate OpenAI has.

A part time minimum wage worker can't code

Re: GPT-5.2

#687

Post by nextworddev » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:44 AM UTC

blitz_skull wrote: post #575

Again I just tap the sign. All of your benchmarks mean nothing to me until you include Claude Sonnet on them. In my experience, GPT hasn’t been able to compete with Claude in years for the daily “economically valuable” tasks I work on.

Claude is pretty trash for anything besides coding

Re: GPT-5.2

#688

Post by mac-attack » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:45 AM UTC

sanex wrote: post #560

scrollop wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why no grok 4.1 reasoning?

Do people other than Elon fans use grok? Honest question. I've never tried it.

I can't understand why people would trust a CEO that regularly lies about product timelines, product features, his own personal life, etc. And that's before politicizing his entire kingdom by literally becoming a part of government and one of the larger donations of the current administration.

Re: GPT-5.2

#689

Post by dudeinhawaii » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:52 AM UTC

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

I noticed a quite noticeable improvement to the point where I made it my go-to model for questions. Coding-wise, not so much. As an intelligent model, writing up designs, investigations, general exploration/research tasks, it's top notch.

Re: GPT-5.2

#690

Post by nathan-wall » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 4:56 AM UTC

ComputerGuru wrote: post #127

Wish they would include or leak more info about what this is, exactly. 5.1 was just released, yet they are claiming big improvements (on benchmarks, obviously). Did they purposely not release the best they had to keep some cards to play in case of Gemini 3 success or is this a tweak to use more time/tokens to get better output, or what?

If you look at their own chart[1] it shows 5.1 was lagging behind Gemini 3 Pro in almost every score listed there, sometimes significantly. They needed to come out with something to stay ahead. I'm guessing they threw what they had at their disposal together to keep the lead as long as they can. It sounds like 5.2 has a more recent knowledge cutoff; a reasonable guess is they could have already had that but were trying to make bigger improvements out of it for a more major 5.5 release before Gemini 3 Pro came out and then they had to rush something out. Also 5.2 has a new "Extended Thinking" option for Pro. I'm guessing they just turned up a lever that told it to think even longer, which helps them score higher, even if it does take a long time. (One thing about Gemini 3 Pro is it's very fast relative to even ChatGPT 5.1 Pro Thinking. A lot of the scores they're putting out to show they're staying ahead aren't showing that piece.)

[1] https://imgur.com/e0iB8KC