Thread

1. minimaxir · 1790702170 · focus · HN ↗

   > Cached input costs just $0.10 per million tokens—95% less than standard input pricing and 50% less than GPT‑6 Sol’s cached input pricing

   This is the actual big announcement. 50% cheaper cache than GPT-6 Sol will get you far more mileage on Codex.

   1. TuxSH · 1790702497 · focus · HN ↗

      Exactly half as expensive as Opus 5.5 in every API pricing metric

      1. bigwheels · 1790703039 · focus · HN ↗

         And half as good. I didn't have great experiences with Anthropic models in the past, but Opus 5.5 seems to have turned a major corner. It is churning through tasks significantly more quickly and efficiently.

         Suggest trying it out yourself: Ask for something difficult from GPT-6 Sol and Opus 5.5 and watch what each one does. The difference is stark.

         Edit: Defining "difficult" as a complex coding or systems task (or even series of them in a single prompt).

         1. Infinity315 · 1790703186 · focus · HN ↗

            I'm not an OpenAI simp, but how anyone can have any opinion on the performance of these models in less than a day - let alone a few hours - is beyond me.

            1. phoghed · 1790705158 · focus · HN ↗

               I think it’s one of the reasons why you often see people decrying the lessening capabilities of the models a few weeks later, despite there being 0 proof of any changes, and evidence of the models staying the same from sites that track it.

               They form these super strong opinions after a few prompts, then face reality over time.

               People have been talking about how good whatever model is at “complex” tasks since the beginning, never mind that all of those models are now outperformed by Luna which many people consider unusable for complex work.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.