3 ms·

It's $3.80 for the full 1000 prompt tokens plus 32k token long context. But OpenAI doesn't have a monopoly on long context, RWKV is free and open source and has

by fswd 4y ago

It's $3.80 for the full 1000 prompt tokens plus 32k token long context. But OpenAI doesn't have a monopoly on long context, RWKV is free and open source and has virtually an unlimited context (as long as you remind it every once and a while). However ChatGPT really cannot be matched at this point perhaps except LLaMa Alpaca 7B EDIT: I accidentially typed Alpine, it's Alpaca. https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca

sebzim4500 4y ago
Alpaca is supposed to be roughly comparable to GPT-3.5, which means it is probably far worse than GPT-4.
- stavros 4y ago
  But also gpt-3.5-turbo is far worse than davinci-003.
  - sebzim4500 4y ago
    By what metric? For most stuff 3.5 is better in my experience. Assuming you are trying to complete an actual task rather than have fun.
    - stavros 4y ago
      I've tried to make an assistant with ChatGPT, because it's cheaper, and it's abysmally worse than davinci-003 at following instructions and reasoning.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - artdigital 4y ago
      3.5-turbo is already worse than 3.5-legacy, you can try this with chatgpt plus. Use the normal (turbo) model and then use the legacy model, you will almost certainly feel a difference in quality Turbo prioritizes speed (probably due to cost?), the legacy model has far higher quality of output. You can confirm this on Reddit where none of the chatgpt plus userbase seems happy with turbo and the general recommendation is to switch it back to legacy. I tried porting a mini project from davinci to the new turbo api and quickly reverted it, turbo output is a lot more all over the place and very hard to get into something useful. It’s a fun chatbot though and still great for simple tasks You get what you pay for, and there’s a reason 3.5-turbo is so cheap
Metus 4y ago
There is also https://open-assistant.io https://open-assistant.io by LAION.

by fswd 4y ago

sebzim4500 4y ago

Alpaca is supposed to be roughly comparable to GPT-3.5, which means it is probably far worse than GPT-4.

stavros 4y ago
But also gpt-3.5-turbo is far worse than davinci-003.
- sebzim4500 4y ago
  By what metric? For most stuff 3.5 is better in my experience. Assuming you are trying to complete an actual task rather than have fun.
  - stavros 4y ago
    I've tried to make an assistant with ChatGPT, because it's cheaper, and it's abysmally worse than davinci-003 at following instructions and reasoning.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - artdigital 4y ago
    3.5-turbo is already worse than 3.5-legacy, you can try this with chatgpt plus. Use the normal (turbo) model and then use the legacy model, you will almost certainly feel a difference in quality Turbo prioritizes speed (probably due to cost?), the legacy model has far higher quality of output. You can confirm this on Reddit where none of the chatgpt plus userbase seems happy with turbo and the general recommendation is to switch it back to legacy. I tried porting a mini project from davinci to the new turbo api and quickly reverted it, turbo output is a lot more all over the place and very hard to get into something useful. It’s a fun chatbot though and still great for simple tasks You get what you pay for, and there’s a reason 3.5-turbo is so cheap

Metus 4y ago

There is also https://open-assistant.io https://open-assistant.io by LAION.