4 ms·

They will retire lots of models: GPT-4o, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.5, GPT-4.1-mini, o4-mini, o4-mini-high, o3, o3-pro. https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6825453-chatgpt

by hrpnk 1y ago

They will retire lots of models: GPT-4o, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.5, GPT-4.1-mini, o4-mini, o4-mini-high, o3, o3-pro. https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6825453-chatgpt-release-notes https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6825453-chatgpt-release-... "If you open a conversation that used one of these models, ChatGPT will automatically switch it to the closest GPT-5 equivalent." - 4o, 4.1, 4.5, 4.1-mini, o4-mini, or o4-mini-high => GPT-5 - o3 => GPT-5-Thinking - o3-Pro => GPT-5-Pro

pradn 1y ago
Finally, someone from the product side got a word in. Keep it simple!
- hobofan 1y ago
  Keeping it simple in that regard will just drive even more enterprise users into the arms of Microsoft.
  - mi_lk 1y ago
    Why is that?
    - cowsandmilk 1y ago
      Many companies face model regressions on actively used workflows. Microsoft is the cloud provider who won’t force you to upgrade to new models. This has driven enterprises facing model regressions to Microsoft, not just for workflows facing this problem, but also new workflows just to be safe and not have to migrate clouds if there is a regression.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - csomar 1y ago
        This could have been solved with GPT-{year/month/day} and GPT-latest. But OpenAI is a hype machine not an AI machine.
    - orbital-decay 1y ago
      Imagine you put a ton of effort into testing and taming a particular snapshot for your use case, just to find that the AI shop is pulling the rug.
      - sunaookami 1y ago
        It is still supported in the API.
atonse 1y ago
Smart way to probably also free up resources that are currently fragmented running those older models. They could all run the latest model and have more capacity.
- ComputerGuru 1y ago
  API usage is not affected by this.
  - hrpnk 1y ago
    I guess deprecation on API side is coming some time soon as well
  - atonse 1y ago
    I wonder what the volume is between casual users of the chat vs the API
baobabKoodaa 1y ago
GPT-5-nano does not support temperature parameter and is giving me worse quality results than GPT-4.1-nano. Will be interesting if they truly do end up retiring a better model in favor of a worse one.
- BoorishBears 1y ago
  They probably will. Given how fast GPT 5 is, it feels like all the models are very small. Maybe to service more users they're thinking they'll shrink the models and have reasoning close the gap... of course, that only really works for verifiable tasks. And I've seen the claims of a "universal verifier", but that feels like the Philosopher's Stone of AI. Everyone who's tried it has shown limited carryover between verifiable tasks (like code) to tasks with subjective preference. - To clarify also: I don't think this is nefarious. I think as you serve more users, you need to at least try to reign in the unit economics. Even OpenAI can only afford to burn so many dollars per user per week once they're trying to serve a billion users a week. At some point there isn't even enough money to be raised to keep up with costs.
nikanj 1y ago
"GPT-4o, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.5, GPT-4.1-mini, o4-mini, o4-mini-high, o3, o3-pro" The names of GPT models are just terrible. o3 is better than 4o, maybe?
- aniviacat 1y ago
  Fortunately that changes with the GPT-5 release
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 1y ago
  They consulted Microsoft's experts in naming things.
thimabi 1y ago
I personally hated this decision. Of course, I know that having a line-up of tons of models is quite confusing. Yet I also believe users on the paid plan deserve more options. As a paying user, I liked the ability to set which models to use each time, in particular switching between o4-mini and o4-mini-high. Now they’ve deprecated this feature and I’m stuck with their base GPT-5 model or GPT-5 Thinking, which seems akin to o3 and thus has much smaller usage limits. Only God knows whether their routing will work as well as my previous system for selecting models.
- calmoo 1y ago
  As a paying user I personally love it. No decision fatigure. I'll let them decide.
- el_benhameen 1y ago
  This is where I’m at, too. The o3 limits were more restrictive than the 5-thinking limits are now, but I regularly used o4-mini-high for complex-but-not-brain-breaking questions and was quite happy with the result. Now I have to choose between saving my usage with 5, which so far hasn’t felt up to the more complex use cases, or burn usage much faster with 5-thinking. I suppose this is probably the point. I’m still not super keen on ponying up 200 bucks a month, but it’s more likely now.
dougdonohoe 1y ago
I don't have confidence that systems built on top of a specific model will work the same on a higher version. Unlike, say, the Go programming language where backwards compatibility is something you can generally count on (with exceptions being well documented). I wouldn't want to be in charge of regression testing an LLM-based enterprise software app when bumping the underlying model.
Jcampuzano2 1y ago
It was an obvious decision product wise even if it may not appease some devs. Regular users just see incrementing numbers, why would they want to use 3 or 4 if there is a 5? This is how people who aren't entrenched in AI think. Ask some of your friends what the difference is between models and some will have no clue that currently some of the 3 models are better than 4 models, or they'll not understand what the "o" means at all. And some think why would I ever use mini?
- sothatsit 1y ago
  My girlfriend when asked about models: What do you mean, I just ask ChatGPT? I think people here vastly underestimate how many people just type questions into the chatbox, and that's it. When you think about the product from that perspective, this release is probably a huge jump for many people who have never used anything but the default model. Whereas, if you've been using o3 all along, this is just another nice incremental improvement.
  - nextlevelwizard 1y ago
    Why should average user know the difference? It is frankly ridiculous to assume anyone would think that 4o is in anyway worse then o3. I don't understand why these companies suck at basic marketing this hard, like what is with all these .5s and mini and other shit names. Just increment the fucking number or if you are embarrassed by having to increase the number all the time just use year/month. Then you can have different flavors like "light and fast" or "deep thinker" and of course just the regular "GPT X"

by hrpnk 1y ago

pradn 1y ago

Finally, someone from the product side got a word in. Keep it simple!

hobofan 1y ago
Keeping it simple in that regard will just drive even more enterprise users into the arms of Microsoft.
- mi_lk 1y ago
  Why is that?
  - cowsandmilk 1y ago
    Many companies face model regressions on actively used workflows. Microsoft is the cloud provider who won’t force you to upgrade to new models. This has driven enterprises facing model regressions to Microsoft, not just for workflows facing this problem, but also new workflows just to be safe and not have to migrate clouds if there is a regression.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - csomar 1y ago
      This could have been solved with GPT-{year/month/day} and GPT-latest. But OpenAI is a hype machine not an AI machine.
  - orbital-decay 1y ago
    Imagine you put a ton of effort into testing and taming a particular snapshot for your use case, just to find that the AI shop is pulling the rug.
    - sunaookami 1y ago
      It is still supported in the API.

atonse 1y ago

Smart way to probably also free up resources that are currently fragmented running those older models. They could all run the latest model and have more capacity.

ComputerGuru 1y ago
API usage is not affected by this.
- hrpnk 1y ago
  I guess deprecation on API side is coming some time soon as well
- atonse 1y ago
  I wonder what the volume is between casual users of the chat vs the API

baobabKoodaa 1y ago

GPT-5-nano does not support temperature parameter and is giving me worse quality results than GPT-4.1-nano. Will be interesting if they truly do end up retiring a better model in favor of a worse one.

BoorishBears 1y ago
They probably will. Given how fast GPT 5 is, it feels like all the models are very small. Maybe to service more users they're thinking they'll shrink the models and have reasoning close the gap... of course, that only really works for verifiable tasks. And I've seen the claims of a "universal verifier", but that feels like the Philosopher's Stone of AI. Everyone who's tried it has shown limited carryover between verifiable tasks (like code) to tasks with subjective preference. - To clarify also: I don't think this is nefarious. I think as you serve more users, you need to at least try to reign in the unit economics. Even OpenAI can only afford to burn so many dollars per user per week once they're trying to serve a billion users a week. At some point there isn't even enough money to be raised to keep up with costs.

nikanj 1y ago

"GPT-4o, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.5, GPT-4.1-mini, o4-mini, o4-mini-high, o3, o3-pro" The names of GPT models are just terrible. o3 is better than 4o, maybe?

aniviacat 1y ago
Fortunately that changes with the GPT-5 release
isbvhodnvemrwvn 1y ago
They consulted Microsoft's experts in naming things.

thimabi 1y ago

I personally hated this decision. Of course, I know that having a line-up of tons of models is quite confusing. Yet I also believe users on the paid plan deserve more options. As a paying user, I liked the ability to set which models to use each time, in particular switching between o4-mini and o4-mini-high. Now they’ve deprecated this feature and I’m stuck with their base GPT-5 model or GPT-5 Thinking, which seems akin to o3 and thus has much smaller usage limits. Only God knows whether their routing will work as well as my previous system for selecting models.

calmoo 1y ago
As a paying user I personally love it. No decision fatigure. I'll let them decide.
el_benhameen 1y ago
This is where I’m at, too. The o3 limits were more restrictive than the 5-thinking limits are now, but I regularly used o4-mini-high for complex-but-not-brain-breaking questions and was quite happy with the result. Now I have to choose between saving my usage with 5, which so far hasn’t felt up to the more complex use cases, or burn usage much faster with 5-thinking. I suppose this is probably the point. I’m still not super keen on ponying up 200 bucks a month, but it’s more likely now.

dougdonohoe 1y ago

I don't have confidence that systems built on top of a specific model will work the same on a higher version. Unlike, say, the Go programming language where backwards compatibility is something you can generally count on (with exceptions being well documented). I wouldn't want to be in charge of regression testing an LLM-based enterprise software app when bumping the underlying model.

Jcampuzano2 1y ago

It was an obvious decision product wise even if it may not appease some devs. Regular users just see incrementing numbers, why would they want to use 3 or 4 if there is a 5? This is how people who aren't entrenched in AI think. Ask some of your friends what the difference is between models and some will have no clue that currently some of the 3 models are better than 4 models, or they'll not understand what the "o" means at all. And some think why would I ever use mini?

sothatsit 1y ago
My girlfriend when asked about models: What do you mean, I just ask ChatGPT? I think people here vastly underestimate how many people just type questions into the chatbox, and that's it. When you think about the product from that perspective, this release is probably a huge jump for many people who have never used anything but the default model. Whereas, if you've been using o3 all along, this is just another nice incremental improvement.
- nextlevelwizard 1y ago
  Why should average user know the difference? It is frankly ridiculous to assume anyone would think that 4o is in anyway worse then o3. I don't understand why these companies suck at basic marketing this hard, like what is with all these .5s and mini and other shit names. Just increment the fucking number or if you are embarrassed by having to increase the number all the time just use year/month. Then you can have different flavors like "light and fast" or "deep thinker" and of course just the regular "GPT X"