Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

How much better are models at coding now vs 2 years ago? Side by side coding performance from GPT-4 (June '23) to GPT-5 (Aug '25) with an identical prompt: "Create a single page HTML of a fruit machine simulation" Please watch the video until the end and tell me...

123,694 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

25 Comments

Uri Gil's profile picture
Uri Gil1 year ago

4.1 is an absolute beast

Peter Gostev's profile picture
Peter Gostev1 year ago

The amount of code it was actually outputting was kind of crazy, especially comparing it to previous non-reasoning models, it is so much better than older ones

Uri Gil's profile picture
Uri Gil1 year ago

i think thats because its the only model openai made specifically for "coding" rather than "software engineering", i.e = winning swe contests.

ハセン حسن's profile picture
ハセン حسن1 year ago

LLM models have not improved much since last year Contrived examples like the one you're demoing do not prove anything. Ask any recent "state of the art" model to do something that slightly deviates from the established patterns and it will just hallucinate.

Lucas Baker's profile picture
Lucas Baker1 year ago

I don’t see the progress as being all that significant. There has been some modest improvement, but even the newest models output a lot of garbage. Though, one would think otherwise to listen to the hype squad on social media.

cedric gamelin's profile picture
cedric gamelin1 year ago

in our games we even see some regression w claude

Petri Kuittinen's profile picture
Petri Kuittinen1 year ago

I don't even need to watch the video, as I have tested well over 100 LLMs in the past few years. I know the progress has been massive, especially in coding & math. Now imagine what the next 2 years can bring us. Probably the best AI agents can in 2 years work an entire 8 h day without any human interaction needed, doing PRs, ironing out bugs, deploying, optimizing the code for efficiency, hunting down software vulnerabilities and fixing them automatically.

Nathan Benaich's profile picture
Nathan Benaich1 year ago

haha o3-pro is like gambling on crack

Santosh's profile picture
Santosh1 year ago

Gpt 5 pro is missing

Peter Gostev's profile picture
Peter Gostev1 year ago

Good shout, how could I forget!

Santosh's profile picture
Santosh1 year ago

Noice 😋

Pazow's profile picture
Pazow1 year ago

@voids_thoughts made me think of our conversation earlier

Bobby Z's profile picture
Bobby Z1 year ago

very cool, thanks for making this

downthecrop's profile picture
downthecrop1 year ago

One of the worst prompts I've ever read

TH_DA's profile picture
TH_DA1 year ago

frontend design did clearly not evolve at all;)

Wendy Carlosa's profile picture
Wendy Carlosa1 year ago

i have the answer. if it could code well you would put it in an infinite loop of refinement but instead you save backups and retreat to the last one before the abacus dinked you

Mykhailo Sorochuk's profile picture
Mykhailo Sorochuk1 year ago

Progress is evident, but still a long way to go. Would be interesting to see side-by-side iterations over multiple prompts.

Hans's profile picture
Hans1 year ago

Sometime you have to zoom out to see progress!

Peter's profile picture
Peter1 year ago

Great great video

maneramodos's profile picture
maneramodos1 year ago

So what’s the progress here?

sachosdev's profile picture
sachosdev1 year ago

Amazing, thanks for the work! Such a clear depiction of progress. It would be cool to test "Oneshot + 5 iterations" to see how the model capability to iterate over previous prompts improved over the years. ie say "improve it" 5 times and see the final result.

MINURY's profile picture
MINURY1 year ago

@MirraTerminal

Aaron Meurer's profile picture
Aaron Meurer1 year ago

The models have not improved enough in the last 2 years

Morpheus's profile picture
Morpheus1 year ago

I tried chatgtp yesterday for a rather simple bash script. It completely failed and I had to do it by myself which took me half an hour :(

Olli Airola's profile picture
Olli Airola1 year ago

I'm pro AI-for-coding and was actually expecting a huge progress but I literally can't see much progress in the video

Related Videos

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

Chris

250,919 views • 4 months ago