3 ms·
Having tried using it, it is much worse than r1. Both the standard and high effort version.
by llm_trw 2y ago
Having tried using it, it is much worse than r1. Both the standard and high effort version.
- CryptoBanker 2y agoIf it’s actually available, it can’t be that much worse than R1 which currently only completes a response about 50% of the time for me.
- SkyPuncher 2y agoYea, o3-mini was a massive step down from Sonnet for coding tasks. R1 is my cost effective programmer. Sonnet is my hard problem model still.
- llm_trw 2y agoR1 is interesting. Since I have access to the thinking tokens I can see where it's going wrong and do prompt surgery. But left to it's own devices it gets thing _stupendously_ wrong about 20% of the time with a huge context blowout. So much so that seeing that happen now tells me I've fundamentally asked the wrong question. Sonnet doesn't suffer from that and solves the task, but doesn't give you much if any, help in how to recover from doing the wrong task. I'd say that for work work Sonnet 3.5 is still the best, for exploratory work with a human in the loop r1 is better. Or as someone posted here a few days ago: R1 as the architect, Sonnet3.5 as the worker and critic.