4 ms·
Or it could be the start of the enshittification of Anthropic, like OpenAI ruined GPT-4 with GPT-4o by overly simplifying it. I hope not, because Claude is muc
by rvnx 2y ago
Or it could be the start of the enshittification of Anthropic, like OpenAI ruined GPT-4 with GPT-4o by overly simplifying it.
I hope not, because Claude is much better, especially at programming.
- nar001 2y agoThey ruined GPT-4? How? I thought they were basically the same models, just multimodal
- rvnx 2y agoGPT-4o is different from GPT-4, you can "feel" it is smaller model that really struggles to do reasoning and programming and has a much weaker logic. If you compare to Claude Sonnet, just the context window considerably improves the answers as well. Of course there is no objective metrics, but from a user perspective I can see the coding skills are much better in Anthropic (and it's funny, because in theory, according to benchmarks it is Google Gemini the best, but in reality is absolutely terrible).
- toxik 2y agoHave to say I agree with this, 4o is dumber in my subjective experience.
- jstummbillig 2y ago> GPT-4o is different from GPT-4, you can "feel" it is smaller model that really struggles to do reasoning and programming and has a much weaker logic. FWIW according to LMSYS this is not the case. In coding, current GPT-4o (and mini, for that matter) beat GPT-4-Turbo handily, by a margin of 32 points. By contrast Sonnet 3.5 is #1, 4 score points ahead of GPT-4o.
- whymauri 2y agoI'm a firm believer that the best benchmark is playing around with the model for like an hour. On the type of tasks that are relevant to you and your work, of course.
- patrickdward 2y agoI've also found GPT-4o to be subjectively less intelligent than GPT-4. The gap especially shows up when more complex reasoning is required, eg, on macroeconomic questions or other domains in the world where the interactions are important or where subtle aspects of the question or domain are important.
- pokepim 2y ago[dead]
- meowface 2y agoClaude 3.5 Sonnet is the first model that made me realize that the era of AI-aided programming is here. Its ability to generate and modify large amounts of correct code - across multiple files/modules - in one response beats anything I've tried before. Integrating that with specialized editors (like https://www.cursor.com https://www.cursor.com) is an early vision of the future of software development.
- rvnx 2y agoOh yes, totally agree, it's like if you have a very experienced programmer sitting next to you. He still needs instructions on what to do next, he lacks a bit of "initiative", but from a pure coding skills it's amazing (aka, we will get replaced over time, and it's already the case, I don't need help of contractors, I prefer to ask Claude).
- gizmo 2y agoMore like an insanely knowledgeable but very inexperienced programmer. It will get basic algorithms wrong (unless it's in the exact shape it has seen before). It's like a system that automatically copy-pastes the top answer from stackoverflow in your code. Sometimes that is what you want, but most of the time it isn't.
- valval 2y agoThis sentiment is so far from the truth that I find it hilarious. How can a technically adept person be so out of touch with what these systems are already capable of?
- gizmo 2y agoLLMs can write a polite email but it can't write a good novel. It can create art or music (by mushing together things it has seen before) but not art that excites. It's the same with code. I use LLMs daily and I've seen videos of other people using tools like Cursor and so far it looks like these LLMs can only help in those situations where it is pretty obvious (to the programmer) what the right answer looks like.