9 comments

  • codingwagie a day ago ago

    Yes, I have written code I could not have without the model. To me, 200$ is cheap. It's better than claude 3.5 by a wide margin if you know how to prompt for coding.

    • achempion a day ago ago

      Can you please provide an example? With my experience the code it generates is mediocre at best. It works after a couple of nudges, but the approach to problem is quite average with lots of oversights.

    • schappim 21 hours ago ago

      I haven’t been able to replicate the claim that it’s “better than Claude 3.5 by a wide margin.” In my experience, they’re often quite comparable and deliver similar results about half the time.

  • thiago_fm a day ago ago

    It doesn't feel like its performance represents how better it can benchmark against competitors. You'll barely feel it if you are using it for coding if you compare it to Claude.

    Anyways, it's very good. Possibly the best. It can write really well and much better than GPT-4. Maybe it's just my own taste, but it looks less LLM-ish.

    I'm just not sure if it's worth the $200/month. Claude is cheaper and you can use it on Cursor so well.

    The tiered pricing for OpenAI offering looks very weak. They have the best product, but it isn't worth $200, sorry.

    • solardev a day ago ago

      Is Claude significantly better than regular o1 (not pro)?

  • nbdy 7 hours ago ago

    no. the reasoning takes long and often still hallucinates.

  • JojoFatsani a day ago ago

    Use an API key and something like TypingMind and you shouldn’t pay anywhere near 200 for chat like usage