正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Huge respect for GPT-5.6 Sol, but this is on another level.

define

1,684 subscribers

13,047 次观看 • 18 天前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Is insane the new GPT 5.6 sol This is a 21-minute tutorial on how to create premium cinematic websites of $100,000 (step by step) with GPT 5.6 Sol!

Is insane the new GPT 5.6 sol This is a 21-minute tutorial on how to create premium cinematic websites of $100,000 (step by step) with GPT 5.6 Sol!

me

269,077 次观看 • 12 天前

This test shows clearly why GPT 5.6 Sol wins I asked the simplest prompt ever : > Create a gmail clone, the nearest possible to the real gmail ui You can see the result, GPT 5.6 Sol and Fable make a 100% perfect But here's the price difference: → GPT 5.6 Terra: $1.04 - 8 minutes → GPT 5.6 Luna: $0.44 - 10 minutes → GPT 5.6 Sol: $6.72 - 20 minutes → Claude Fable 5: $25.09 - 40 minutes Fable is 3.7x more expensive than Sol for "the same result"

This test shows clearly why GPT 5.6 Sol wins I asked the simplest prompt ever : > Create a gmail clone, the nearest possible to the real gmail ui You can see the result, GPT 5.6 Sol and Fable make a 100% perfect But here's the price difference: → GPT 5.6 Terra: $1.04 - 8 minutes → GPT 5.6 Luna: $0.44 - 10 minutes → GPT 5.6 Sol: $6.72 - 20 minutes → Claude Fable 5: $25.09 - 40 minutes Fable is 3.7x more expensive than Sol for "the same result"

Melvyn • Builder

22,212 次观看 • 14 天前

The New GPT 5.6 Sol is insane. ❤️‍🔥Just recorded a 21-min Full Tutorial on How To Build Premium, Cinematic Websites with GPT 5.6 Sol!

The New GPT 5.6 Sol is insane. ❤️‍🔥Just recorded a 21-min Full Tutorial on How To Build Premium, Cinematic Websites with GPT 5.6 Sol!

Viktor Oddy

838,193 次观看 • 18 天前

Kimi K3 beating Fable and Sol on price and quality. Command Code's internal flappy bench results are in. Really impressed with the results. For Kimi K3 we set the gameplay to hard while Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol were set to easier. Cost breakdown: • Kimi K3: $0.024 •Fable 5: $0.42 •GPT-5.6 Sol: $0.15 Ranking based on DX & features: •Kimi K3: 8/10 •Fable 5: 7.5/10 • GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 GPT 5.6 Sol max can definitely go on longer and wins the game overall, but that's something different. Grok 4.5 beats GPT 5.6 Sol on that, lol.Mm-hmm.

Kimi K3 beating Fable and Sol on price and quality. Command Code's internal flappy bench results are in. Really impressed with the results. For Kimi K3 we set the gameplay to hard while Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol were set to easier. Cost breakdown: • Kimi K3: $0.024 •Fable 5: $0.42 •GPT-5.6 Sol: $0.15 Ranking based on DX & features: •Kimi K3: 8/10 •Fable 5: 7.5/10 • GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 GPT 5.6 Sol max can definitely go on longer and wins the game overall, but that's something different. Grok 4.5 beats GPT 5.6 Sol on that, lol.Mm-hmm.

Ahmad Awais

254,793 次观看 • 12 天前

gpt 5.6 sol just one-shot my whole launch video. this is insane.

gpt 5.6 sol just one-shot my whole launch video. this is insane.

Shengkun

17,128 次观看 • 19 天前

the new age of 'personalized shopping' I made a clone of aritzia where I'm the model on every piece of clothing Buillt with gpt-5.6-sol standard...but just you wait for gpt-5.6-sol ultrafast (750 tok/s) running on Cerebras coming soon 👀

the new age of 'personalized shopping' I made a clone of aritzia where I'm the model on every piece of clothing Buillt with gpt-5.6-sol standard...but just you wait for gpt-5.6-sol ultrafast (750 tok/s) running on Cerebras coming soon 👀

Sarah Chieng

16,764 次观看 • 4 天前

Did GPT-5.6 Sol beat Fable 5 for frontend work? GPT-5.5 got roasted for its frontend. Had to test the new one. Same challenge: one prompt + one reference image → Three.js 3D globe dashboard. Verdict: Fable 5 still edges it out. But at half the cost, GPT-5.6 Sol is a serious option now.

Did GPT-5.6 Sol beat Fable 5 for frontend work? GPT-5.5 got roasted for its frontend. Had to test the new one. Same challenge: one prompt + one reference image → Three.js 3D globe dashboard. Verdict: Fable 5 still edges it out. But at half the cost, GPT-5.6 Sol is a serious option now.

Kai

21,502 次观看 • 19 天前

Here's a look at GPT-5.6 Sol Ultrafast running on Cerebras, side by side with regular Sol. OpenAI has said Sol on Cerebras launches this month for select customers. h/t Max

Here's a look at GPT-5.6 Sol Ultrafast running on Cerebras, side by side with regular Sol. OpenAI has said Sol on Cerebras launches this month for select customers. h/t Max

M1

258,798 次观看 • 11 天前

👀 GPT 5.6 Sol Prompt below ↓

👀 GPT 5.6 Sol Prompt below ↓

Bogdan • QClay | Awsmd

190,741 次观看 • 13 天前

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5. I put both through my hardest frontend test: a 3D globe dashboard. Same prompt. Same reference image. Sol on the left. Fable on the right. GPT-5.6 Sol is a major leap from 5.5. Fable 5 still wins on spacing, balance, and first-pass polish. For me, Sol comes close at half the cost.

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5. I put both through my hardest frontend test: a 3D globe dashboard. Same prompt. Same reference image. Sol on the left. Fable on the right. GPT-5.6 Sol is a major leap from 5.5. Fable 5 still wins on spacing, balance, and first-pass polish. For me, Sol comes close at half the cost.

Kai

198,151 次观看 • 19 天前

Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol. I reused the 3D globe test from Kimi vs Fable 5. Same prompt. Same reference image. Kimi K3 left. GPT-5.6 Sol right. Kimi edges out Sol on UI fidelity and globe realism. At current API prices, Kimi is about 50% cheaper. For frontend work, it's my pick.

Kimi K3 vs GPT-5.6 Sol. I reused the 3D globe test from Kimi vs Fable 5. Same prompt. Same reference image. Kimi K3 left. GPT-5.6 Sol right. Kimi edges out Sol on UI fidelity and globe realism. At current API prices, Kimi is about 50% cheaper. For frontend work, it's my pick.

Kai

15,769 次观看 • 7 天前

well, i connected GPT-5.6 Sol to Blender and... let's just say the world of 3D graphics (at least via Blender's MCP) is safe for now... but still... this whole scene was generated by GPT-5.6 with very little human intervention feels like *EARLY* pixar, like too early lol

well, i connected GPT-5.6 Sol to Blender and... let's just say the world of 3D graphics (at least via Blender's MCP) is safe for now... but still... this whole scene was generated by GPT-5.6 with very little human intervention feels like EARLY pixar, like too early lol

Gavin Purcell

61,662 次观看 • 15 天前

GPT 5.6 Sol is Codex is powerful for 3D asset generation. 🤯 Here is an example of a Tank created using Codex.

GPT 5.6 Sol is Codex is powerful for 3D asset generation. 🤯 Here is an example of a Tank created using Codex.

Jayden Davis

32,194 次观看 • 5 天前

wow... GPT 5.6 Sol Passed the Replit Benchmark. In one prompt 5.6 on Codex created a full Replit clone with DB, Sandboxes, and an agent that builds and edits full web apps. Only Fable and GPT 5.6 have passed this benchmark. 5.6 is much better at designing iOS apps than 5.5 as well.

wow... GPT 5.6 Sol Passed the Replit Benchmark. In one prompt 5.6 on Codex created a full Replit clone with DB, Sandboxes, and an agent that builds and edits full web apps. Only Fable and GPT 5.6 have passed this benchmark. 5.6 is much better at designing iOS apps than 5.5 as well.

Riley Brown

123,242 次观看 • 20 天前

⚡️OPENAI: GPT-5.6 SOL IS 54% MORE TOKEN EFFICIENT ON AGENTIC CODING Sam Altman says the new GPT-5.6 Sol model is 54% more token efficient on agentic coding tasks and is “as good or better” than competing models. He also said OpenAI aims to offer better value with “every enterprise now is thinking about spend and the value they’re getting in exchange for AI.”

⚡️OPENAI: GPT-5.6 SOL IS 54% MORE TOKEN EFFICIENT ON AGENTIC CODING Sam Altman says the new GPT-5.6 Sol model is 54% more token efficient on agentic coding tasks and is “as good or better” than competing models. He also said OpenAI aims to offer better value with “every enterprise now is thinking about spend and the value they’re getting in exchange for AI.”

Coin Bureau

33,775 次观看 • 19 天前

We are officially in the era where one prompt can ship a complete playable game in <50 bucks! Asked Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol to clone Terraria, max effort level Both are playable and offer a smooth experience GPT 5.6 Sol did it at roughly 1/4 the cost and in 2/3 the runtime: - GPT 5.6 Sol: ~$35, ~1h 20m - Claude Fable 5: ~$120, ~2h Tho Fable still produced the strongest results 🥲

We are officially in the era where one prompt can ship a complete playable game in <50 bucks! Asked Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol to clone Terraria, max effort level Both are playable and offer a smooth experience GPT 5.6 Sol did it at roughly 1/4 the cost and in 2/3 the runtime: - GPT 5.6 Sol: ~$35, ~1h 20m - Claude Fable 5: ~$120, ~2h Tho Fable still produced the strongest results 🥲

GMI Cloud

127,195 次观看 • 19 天前

GPT-5.6 Terra and Sol are now available in Perplexity and Perplexity Computer.

GPT-5.6 Terra and Sol are now available in Perplexity and Perplexity Computer.

Perplexity

117,547 次观看 • 19 天前

After a lot of tests: NO, Luna is nice ON THE benchmark but an absolute shit in terms of design experience Looks like GPT 5.5 basically And at the end, Luna xhigh is MORE expensive than GPT 5.6 Sol medium So, completely useless model

After a lot of tests: NO, Luna is nice ON THE benchmark but an absolute shit in terms of design experience Looks like GPT 5.5 basically And at the end, Luna xhigh is MORE expensive than GPT 5.6 Sol medium So, completely useless model

Melvyn • Builder

78,979 次观看 • 15 天前

GPT-5.6-Sol-Ultra: "Take this image and turn it into a game. Be creative." 30 mins, one shot

GPT-5.6-Sol-Ultra: "Take this image and turn it into a game. Be creative." 30 mins, one shot

Peter Gostev

139,139 次观看 • 16 天前

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

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

249,713 次观看 • 1 个月前