24 ms·
OpenAI o3-pro
- mmsc 1y agoI understand that things are moving fast and all, but surely the.. 8? models which are currently available is a bit .. overwhelming for users that just want to get answers to their questions of life? What's the end goal with having so many models available?
- Osyris 1y agoThis is a much more expensive model to run and is only available to users who pay the most. I don't see an issue. However, the "plus" plan absolutely could use some trimming.
- djrj477dhsnv 1y agoIf it's better (and newer) than gpt4, it shouldn't have a lower version number.
- bachittle 1y agofree users don't have this model selector, and probably don't care which model they get so 4o is good enough. paid users at 20$/month get more models which are better, like o3. paid users at 200$/month get the best models that are also costing OpenAI the most money, like o3-pro. I think they plan to unify them with GPT-5.
- stavros 1y agoThat doesn't help much when we're asymptotically approaching GPT-5. We're probably going to be at GPT-4.9999 soon.
- rfw300 1y agoNot necessarily true. GPT-4.1 was released after GPT-4.5-preview. Next model might be GPT-3.7.
- nikcub 1y agoI'd be curious what proportion of paid users ever switch models. I'd guess < 10%
- CamperBob2 1y agoI switch to o1-pro on occasion, but it is slow enough that I don't use it as much as some of the others. It is a reasonably-effective last resort when I'm not getting the answer quality that I think should be achievable. It's the best available reasoning model from any provider by a noticeable margin. Sounds like o3-pro is even slower, which is fine as long as it's better. o4-mini-high is my usual go-to model if I need something better than the default GPT4-du jour. I don't see much point in the others and don't understand why they remain available. If o3-pro really is consistently better, it will move o1-pro into that category for me.
- CuriouslyC 1y agoIf you're not at least switching from 4o to 4.1 you're doing it wrong.
- motoxpro 1y ago4o is better than 4.1 for a lot of things that are non-coding/general research.
- blurbleblurble 1y agoOverwhelming yet pretty underwhelming
- nickysielicki 1y agoI just can’t believe nobody at the company has enough courage to tell their leadership that their naming scheme is completely stupid and insane. Four is greater than three, and so four should be better than three. The point of a name is to describe something so that you don’t confuse your users, not to be cute.
- browningstreet 1y agoAt Techcrunch AI last week, the OpenAI guy started his presentation by acknowledging that OpenAI knows their naming is a problem and they're working on it, but it won't be fixed immediately.
- moomin 1y agoI know they have a deep relationship with Microsoft, but perhaps they shouldn’t have used Microsoft’s product naming department.
- simonw 1y agoSam Altman has said the same thing on Twitter a few times. https://x.com/sama/status/1911906570835022319 https://x.com/sama/status/1911906570835022319 > how about we fix our model naming by this summer and everyone gets a few more months to make fun of us (which we very much deserve) until then?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- levocardia 1y agoThere's a humorous version of Poe's law that says "any sufficiently genuine attempt to explain the differences between OpenAI's models is indistinguishable from parody"
- paxys 1y ago> users that just want to get answers to their questions of life Those users go to chat.openai.com (or download the app), type text in the box and click send.
- AtlasBarfed 1y agoI'd like one to do my test use case: Port unix-sed from c to java with a full test suite and all options supported. Somewhere between "it answers questions of life" and "it beats PhDs at math questions", I'd like to see one LLM take this, IMO, rather "pure" language task and succeeed. It is complicated, but it isn't complex. It's string operations with a deep but not that deep expression system and flag set. It is well-described and documented on the internet, and presumably training sets. It is succinctly described as a problem that virtually all computer coders would understand what it entailed if it were assigned to them. It is drudgerous, showing the opportunity for LLMs to show how they would improve true productivity. GPT fails to do anything other than the most basic substitute operations. Claude was only slightly better, but to its detriment hallucinated massive amounts and made fake passing test cases that didn't even test the code. The reaction I get to this test is ambivalence, but IMO if LLMs could help port entire software packages between languages with similar feature sets (aside from Turing Completeness), then software cross-use would explode, and maybe we could port "vulnerable" code to "safe" Rust en masse. I get it, it's not what they are chasing customer-wise. They want to write (in n-gate terms) webcrap.
- CamperBob2 1y agoHow does the latest Gemini 2.5 Pro Ultra Flash Max Hemi XLT release do on that task? It obviously demands a massive context window.
- AtlasBarfed 1y agoI'll check once I get the nitrous tanks and the aftermarket turbos overnighted from Japan arrive.
- nipah 1y agoI have a very simple question with like, 5 lines at best, that basically no model, neither reasoning or simpler could grasp. For obvious reasons I'm not disclosing it here (because I fear data contamination in the long run), but it basically breaks the "reasoning" of those things. Unfortunately, I still can't try the o3-pro because the API version is not easily available, and I'm certainly not willing to pay for it in pro mode, but when it comes to the plus version (if it comes) I'll try. To this date, because of this question (and similar ones) I stand very unimpressed with those models, the marketing is a thousand times larger than reality, and I suspect people in general are surprisingly less capable of detecting intelligence than they think. The normal o3 also managed to break 3 isolated installations of linux I was trying it with, a few days ago. The task was very simple, simply setup ubuntu with btrfs, timeshift and grub-btrfs and it managed to fail every single time (even when searching the web), so it was not impressive either.
- resters 1y agoModels are used for actual tasks where predictable behavior is a benefit. Models are also used on cutting-edge tasks where smarter/better outputs are highly valued. Some applications value speed and so a new, smaller/cheaper model can be just right. I think the naming scheme is just fine and is very straightforward to anyone who pays the slightest bit of attention.
- manmal 1y agoThe benchmarks don’t look _that_ much better than o3. Does that mean Pro models are just incrementally better than base models, or are we approaching the higher end of a sigmoid function, with performance gains leveling off?
- bachittle 1y agoit's the same model as o3, just with thinking tokens turned up to the max.
- Tiberium 1y agoThat's simply not true, it's not just "max thinking budget o3" just like o1-pro wasn't "max thinking budget o1". The specifics are unknown, but they might be doing multiple model generations and then somehow picking the best answer each time? Of course that's a gross simplification, but some assume that they do it this way.
- Gerardo1 1y ago> That's simply not true, it's not just "max thinking budget o3" > The specifics are unknown, but they might... Hold up. > but some assume that they do it this way. Come on now.
- MallocVoidstar 1y agoGood luck finding the tweet (I can't) but at least one OpenAI engineer has said that o1-pro was not just 'o1 thinking longer'.
- boole1854 1y agoI also don't have that tweet saved, but I do remember it.
- PhilippGille 1y agoThis one? Found with Kagi Assistant. https://x.com/michpokrass/status/1869102222598152627 https://x.com/michpokrass/status/1869102222598152627 It says: > hey aidan, not a miscommunication, they are different products! o1 pro is a different implementation and not just o1 with high reasoning.
- tiahura 1y agoSo, upgrade to Teams and pay the $50? Plus more usage of o3. Seems like it might be a shot at the $100 claude max?
- dog436zkj3p7 1y agoWhat do you mean with "pay the $50"? Also, does anybody know what limits o3-pro has under the team plan? I don't see it available in the model picker at all (on team).
- sanex 1y agoI believe teams is $25/user with a 2 user minimum.
- dog436zkj3p7 1y agoAh, thanks for explaining!
- carmelion 1y agoJl App
- cluckindan 1y ago[flagged]
- Workaccount2 1y agoWith Gemini 2.5 in AI studio you can now increase the amount of thinking tokens, and it definitely makes a difference. O3 pro is most likely O3 with an expanded thinking token budget.
- energy123 1y agoIsn't that just increasing the upper bound on thinking tokens, which is rarely hit even on much lower levels?
- cluckindan 1y agoIt is not thinking. It is trying to deceive you. The ”reasoning” it outputs does not have a causal relationship with the end result.
- benxh 1y agoThe longer "it" reasons, the more attention sinks are used to come to a "better" final output.
- manmal 1y agoI’ve looked up attention sinks and can’t figure out how you’re using the term here. It sounds interesting, would you care to elaborate?
- Sohcahtoa82 1y ago> The ”reasoning” it outputs does not have a causal relationship with the end result. It absolutely does. Now, we can argue all about whether it's truly "reasoning", but I've certainly seen cases where if you ask it a question but say "Give just the answer", it'll consistently give a wrong answer, whereas if you let it explain its thought process before giving a final answer, it'll consistently get it right. LLMs are at their core just next-token guessing machines. By allowing them to output extra "reasoning" tokens, it can prime the context to give better answers. Think of it like solving an algebraic equation. Humans can't typically solve any but the most trivial equations in a single step, and neither can an LLM. But like a human, an LLM can solve one if it takes it one step at a time.
- ChrisArchitect 1y agoRelated: OpenAI dropped the price of o3 by 80% https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44239359 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44239359
- swyx 1y agohere's a nice user review we published: https://www.latent.space/p/o3-pro https://www.latent.space/p/o3-pro sama's highlight[0]: > "The plan o3 gave us was plausible, reasonable; but the plan o3 Pro gave us was specific and rooted enough that it actually changed how we are thinking about our future." I kept nudging the team to go the whole way to just let o3 be their CEO but they didn't bite yet haha 0: https://x.com/sama/status/1932533208366608568 https://x.com/sama/status/1932533208366608568
- tomComb 1y agoBig fan swyx, but both here and in the article there is some bragging about being quoted by sama, and while I acknowledge that that’s not out of the ordinary, I’m concerned about where it leads: what it takes to get quoted by sama (or similar interested party) is saying something good about his product, and having a decent follower count. Dangerous incentives IMO.
- swyx 1y agoacked. in my defense i didnt write the article + ben already had a good track record from the o1 article. while our relationship with oai is v v v impt to us, we've also covered negative openai stories: https://www.latent.space/p/clippy-v-anton https://www.latent.space/p/clippy-v-anton and will continue to give balanced coverage with the other labs when they do well. we are definitely not seeking to be openai sycophants, nor would they want us to be.
- alightsoul 1y agoif o3 is so good why aren't they using it to replace management?
- martin_corredor 1y agoIt's been 1 day The technology needs to diffuse through and find its equilibrium within the market You could say 3.5/3.7 Sonnet was good enough to replace some juniors but the juniors didn't get replaced immediately - it has a lag in time for it to ripple through
- WhitneyLand 1y agoSo, we currently have o4-mini and o4-mini-high, which represent medium and high usage of “thinking” or use of reasoning tokens. This announcement adds o3-pro, which pairs with o3 in the same way the o4 models go together. It should be called o3-high, but to align with the $200 pro membership it’s called pro instead. That said o3 is already an incredibly powerful model. I prefer it over the new Anthropic 4 models and Gemini 2.5. It’s raw power seems similar to those others, but it’s so good at inline tool use it usually comes out ahead overall. Any non-trivial code generation/editing should be using an advanced reasoning model, or else you’re losing time fixing more glitches or missing out on better quality solutions. Of course the caveat is cost, but there’s value on the frontier.
- boole1854 1y agoNo, this doesn't seem to be correct, although confusion regarding model names is understandable. o4-mini-high is the label on chatgpt.com for what in the API is called o4-mini with reasoning={"effort": "high"}. Whereas o4-mini on chatgpt.com is the same thing as reasoning={"effort": "medium"} in the API. o3 can also be run via the API with reasoning={"effort": "high"}. o3-pro is different than o3 with high reasoning. It has a separate endpoint, and it runs for much longer. See https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/reasoning?api-mode=responses https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/reasoning?api-mode=r...
- johnecheck 1y agoOpenAI started strong in the naming department (ChatGPT, DALL-E) then fell off so hard since.
- x187463 1y agoIt's arguable ChatGPT is not such a great name, either. The general public has no idea what GPT means and will often swap the letters around. It does benefit from being unique, however.
- chad1n 1y agoThe guys in the other thread who said that OpenAI might have quantized o3 and that's how they reduced the price might be right. This o3-pro might be the actual o3-preview from the beginning and the o3 might be just a quantized version. I wish someone benchmarks all of these models to check for drops in quality.
- simonw 1y agoThat's definitely not the case here. The new o3-pro is slow - it took two minutes just to draw me an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle. o3-preview was much faster than that. https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/10/o3-pro/ https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/10/o3-pro/
- k2xl 1y agoNot distilled, same model. https://x.com/therealadamg/status/1932534244774957121?s=46&t=QregCBJQ3PTGk-JKp63zXA https://x.com/therealadamg/status/1932534244774957121?s=46&t...
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- CamperBob2 1y agoWould you say this is the best cycling pelican to date? I don't remember any of the others looking better than this. Of course by now it'll be in-distribution. Time for a new benchmark...
- jstummbillig 1y agoI love that we are in the timeline where we are somewhat seriously evaluating probably super human intelligence by their ability to draw a svg of a cycling pelican.
- CamperBob2 1y ago
- DanMcInerney 1y agoI'm really hoping GPT5 is a larger jump in metrics than the last several releases we've seen like Claude3.5 - Claude4 or o3-mini-high to o3-pro. Although I will preface that with the fact I've been building agents for about a year now and despite the benchmarks only showing slight improvement, I have seen that each new generation feels actively better at exactly the same tasks I gave the previous generation. It would be interesting if there was a model that was specifically trained on task-oriented data. It's my understanding they're trained on all data available, but I wonder if it can be fine-tuned or given some kind of reinforcement learning on breaking down general tasks to specific implementations. Essentially an agent-specific model.
- codingwagie 1y agoI'm seeing big advances that arent shown in the benchmarks, I can simply build software now that I couldnt build before. The level of complexity that I can manage and deliver is higher.
- shmoogy 1y agoYeah I kind of feel like I'm not moving as fast as I did, because the complexity and features grow - constant scope creep due to moving faster.
- alightsoul 1y agomind telling examples?
- motorest 1y agoNot OP, but a couple of days ago I managed to vibecode my way through a small app that pulled data from a few services and did a few validation checks. By itself its not very impressive, but my input was literally "this is how the responses from endpoint A,B and C look like. This field included somewhere in A must be somewhere in the response from B, and the response from C must feature this and that from response A and B. If the responses include links, check that they exist". To my surprise, it generated everything in one go. No retry nor Agent mode churn needed. In the not so distant past this would require progressing through smaller steps, and I had to fill in tests to nudge Agent mode to not mess up. Not today.
- nickandbro 1y ago"create a svg of a pelican riding on a bicycle" https://www.svgviewer.dev/s/c3j6TEAP https://www.svgviewer.dev/s/c3j6TEAP in case anyone is interested
- ikerino 1y agoAm I right to say: doesn't look better than anything we've seen before?
- ikerino 1y agohttps://www.latent.space/p/o3-pro https://www.latent.space/p/o3-pro Have completed around a dozen chats with o3-pro so far. Can't say I'm impressed, output feels qualitatively very similar to regular o3. Tried feeding in loads of context as suggested in the article but generally feels like a miss.
- nake13 1y ago[dead]
- mark_l_watson 1y agoI am still not willing to upgrade to a Pro account. I pay $20 a month for both Gemini and ChatGPT, and for what I need this is currently enough. I have dreamed of having powerful AI ever since I read Bertram Raphael's great book Mind Inside Matter around 1978, getting hooked on AI research and sometimes practical applications for my life since then. I can easily afford $200 for a Pro account but I get this nagging feeling that LLMs are not the final path to the powerful AI I have always dreamed of and I don't want to support this level of hype. I have lived through a few AI winters and I worry that accountants will tally up the costs, environmental and money, versus the benefits and that we collectively have an 'oh shit' moment.
- baq 1y agoLLMs would be transformative technology if all progress stopped today if only for their NLP capabilities, but the recent models obviously do so much more than that. Winter isn’t coming in that regard; what might happen if models won’t get smarter from here is a race to the bottom in token prices, which would still be not bad at all for token buyers.
- buu700 1y agoAgreed. I've said exactly the same thing before. If GPT-4 from two years ago had turned out to be the endgame of LLM technology, and we collectively spent the following 20 years integrating those capabilities throughout the economy, even that would be a profound change to the world as we know it. If we froze LLM technology at present-day capabilities and spent the next 20 years on that, I'd expect it to ultimately look transformative in a similar way to the Internet. I mean if you told me in fall 2022 that 2.5 years later I'd be building software by meta-prompting and meta-meta-prompting AI agents to write code overnight while I slept, I'd assume that we were fictional characters in a Black Mirror episode.
- jwrallie 1y agoI have trouble justifying the $20 tier when compared to other offers for similar service from other providers. I think OpenAI should, every once in a while, offer a new feature with no delay to their Plus tier, with lots of limits of course.
- paul7986 1y agoGPT needs way better image creation! Today I asked it to create a full image of a 2025 calendar highlighting all weekday workdays excluding federal holidays. At the bottom of legend tell me how many weekday work hours are available within criteria noted. It created the image showing each month but when you looked at each month it was so janky ... February 31st and other huge errors! I'm not using image creation to create 3d art for fun or art sake im trying to use it to create utility images to share for discussion with friends & co-workers. The above is just one of many ways it fails when creating utility images!
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- mkl 1y agoWrong tool for the job. Try asking it to generate an SVG calendar with those features, or to generate Python code that produces an SVG calendar with those features.
- catlifeonmars 1y agoThat makes sense. Naively, one would expect this to be the type of reasoning that it should “figure out” on its own.
- paul7986 1y agoWell I just want to create utility images by typing the request in a text box. Im betting a few to maybe a lot of users are trying to create utility images too just by typing in the prompt. I shouldnt need to know how to do that as a GPT and or AI user ... the AI should just do it for the user via their request in the text box. That's the magic of AI to me.
- vintagedave 1y ago> Update to o4-mini (June 6, 2025) > We are rolling back an o4-mini snapshot, that we deployed less than a week ago and intended to improve the length of model responses, because our automated monitoring tools detected an increase in content flags. Does anyone know what it did or returned? I had not seen anything, nor have I read anything, about issues here.
- honeybadger1 1y agoGemini still, for me, feels like the king for speed and accuracy.
- GardenLetter27 1y agoGemini 2.5 Pro is incredible - both in coding and text review. DeepSeek isn't bad either (especially given its age now), and Claude is great for coding and tool use but too damn expensive.
- eru 1y agoI'm trying out o3-pro now with some algorithmic questions. It seems to be doing alright, but it's taking an awfully long time (as expected) and the UIs seem to time out a lot, especially the Android app and the MacOS desktop app. The web interface seems the least flaky, but that's not saying much.
- varjag 1y agoI had my own programming question for a while, which all models from all vendors been robustly failing so far. It is a known problem with surprisingly few published implementations as it had never been a part of leetcode, Euler or typical homework assignments. Yesterday o3-pro cleared it, using a more obscure algorithm I never even heard of.
- reliabilityguy 1y agoCan you provide the details? Sounds intriguing
- jiggawatts 1y agoThe frustrating thing about private problems like this is that if you respond to requests like this, it'll become part of the training data. I'm fairly certain HN is scraped because several AIs know my HN alias and can replicate my style of writing on demand. PS: Thinking about it... that is a very specific kind of disturbing feeling that only prolific online commenters can experience... There's a soulless machine someone made that -- out of billions of people on the planet -- specifically knows me by name and at some level understands how I think and see the world. That's not even its explicit purpose! It and its maker have never met me, interacted with me, or singled me out in any way. Yet... it knows my voice and can copy it on demand.
- okrad 1y agoPerhaps we are not as unique as we’d like to believe. The machine does not understand you. The machine can match your flavor of textual communication. This can be done for audio with a relatively small number of samples. Your iPhone has a feature called Personal Voice which claims it can do it with 150 phrases/15 minutes of your time.
- conradfr 1y agoNitpicking but this page is not practical to share has there's no individual url per post (AFAIK) (the # part is not picked up by Slack etc to generate preview).