Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

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 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 25

Фото профиля Uri Gil
Uri Gil1 год назад

4.1 is an absolute beast

Фото профиля Peter Gostev
Peter Gostev1 год назад

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

Фото профиля Uri Gil
Uri Gil1 год назад

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

Фото профиля ハセン حسن
ハセン حسن1 год назад

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.

Фото профиля Lucas Baker
Lucas Baker1 год назад

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.

Фото профиля cedric gamelin
cedric gamelin1 год назад

in our games we even see some regression w claude

Фото профиля Petri Kuittinen
Petri Kuittinen1 год назад

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.

Фото профиля Nathan Benaich
Nathan Benaich1 год назад

haha o3-pro is like gambling on crack

Фото профиля Santosh
Santosh1 год назад

Gpt 5 pro is missing

Фото профиля Peter Gostev
Peter Gostev1 год назад

Good shout, how could I forget!

Фото профиля Santosh
Santosh1 год назад

Noice 😋

Фото профиля Pazow
Pazow1 год назад

@voids_thoughts made me think of our conversation earlier

Фото профиля Bobby Z
Bobby Z1 год назад

very cool, thanks for making this

Фото профиля downthecrop
downthecrop1 год назад

One of the worst prompts I've ever read

Фото профиля TH_DA
TH_DA1 год назад

frontend design did clearly not evolve at all;)

Фото профиля Wendy Carlosa
Wendy Carlosa1 год назад

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

Фото профиля Mykhailo Sorochuk
Mykhailo Sorochuk1 год назад

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

Фото профиля Hans
Hans1 год назад

Sometime you have to zoom out to see progress!

Фото профиля Peter
Peter1 год назад

Great great video

Фото профиля maneramodos
maneramodos1 год назад

So what’s the progress here?

Фото профиля sachosdev
sachosdev1 год назад

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.

Фото профиля MINURY
MINURY1 год назад

@MirraTerminal

Фото профиля Aaron Meurer
Aaron Meurer1 год назад

The models have not improved enough in the last 2 years

Фото профиля Morpheus
Morpheus1 год назад

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 :(

Фото профиля Olli Airola
Olli Airola1 год назад

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

Похожие видео

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 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад