Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Opus 4.8 for planning 🤝 GPT 5.5 for implementation Claude is a nicer conversation and /grilling partner than Codex in my experience, but GPT 5.5 on low cranks out higher quality code in fewer tokens. Here's how I divide up the work:

Ben Holmes

45,772 subscribers

23,115 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

At Perplexity, GPT-5.5 in Codex helped build an internal tool in under an hour. In Perplexity Computer workflows, GPT-5.5 used 56% fewer tokens on the same complex tasks, creating faster feedback loops for users.

At Perplexity, GPT-5.5 in Codex helped build an internal tool in under an hour. In Perplexity Computer workflows, GPT-5.5 used 56% fewer tokens on the same complex tasks, creating faster feedback loops for users.

OpenAI Developers

68,320 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Claude Opus 4.8 beats Opus 4.7, GPT-5.5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro !! We ran a multimodal gaming comparison across these four closed source models. Opus 4.8 took the longest to generate, but it came out ahead, capturing the most elements from the prompt and successfully hitting the rival cars. GPT 5.5 is still good, but Gemini is no longer the best multimodal model now

Claude Opus 4.8 beats Opus 4.7, GPT-5.5, and Gemini 3.1 Pro !! We ran a multimodal gaming comparison across these four closed source models. Opus 4.8 took the longest to generate, but it came out ahead, capturing the most elements from the prompt and successfully hitting the rival cars. GPT 5.5 is still good, but Gemini is no longer the best multimodal model now

GMI Cloud

116,538 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Kimi K3 Standard’s first shot at my indie spaceship game! Without a shadow of a doubt, this is better than GPT-5.5’s first pass. It’s crazy that we already have an open-source model in the GPT-5.5 to GPT-5.6 class. The estimated API cost for this was just $2.50 worth of tokens. Fable 5: $22 GPT-5.5: $14 I will say that Fable 5 made the game look more visually impressive, but the gap is not that large. I think I could easily get Kimi to match its visual quality within a few iterations. What surprised me most was that Kimi’s version felt much more cohesive and coherent, with fewer bugs than GPT-5.5’s.

Kimi K3 Standard’s first shot at my indie spaceship game! Without a shadow of a doubt, this is better than GPT-5.5’s first pass. It’s crazy that we already have an open-source model in the GPT-5.5 to GPT-5.6 class. The estimated API cost for this was just $2.50 worth of tokens. Fable 5: $22 GPT-5.5: $14 I will say that Fable 5 made the game look more visually impressive, but the gap is not that large. I think I could easily get Kimi to match its visual quality within a few iterations. What surprised me most was that Kimi’s version felt much more cohesive and coherent, with fewer bugs than GPT-5.5’s.

Chris

47,926 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

FREE 2M tokens. Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and every major coding model in one API key. Plugs directly into Claude Code. Inferall gives you access to the full model stack - Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and every other serious coding model - through one unified API. Here's the exact setup: → go to inferall(.)ai with VPN or proxy → sign in and register with any email (Google accounts work best if you hit rate limits) → create an API key - copy the key in format ifu_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx → go to Billing → Add a card → Activate free tier → add your card - a card with zero balance works fine(!!) → set country to United States during checkout Done. 2,000,000 free tokens loaded. Plug into Claude Code or any agent stack: BASE_URL: API_KEY: ifu_XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Works with Claude Code, OpenCode, Hermes Agent, any OpenAI-compatible setup. Opus 4.8 available immediately. 2M tokens is enough for weeks of serious coding sessions.

FREE 2M tokens. Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and every major coding model in one API key. Plugs directly into Claude Code. Inferall gives you access to the full model stack - Opus 4.8, GPT-5.5, and every other serious coding model - through one unified API. Here's the exact setup: → go to inferall(.)ai with VPN or proxy → sign in and register with any email (Google accounts work best if you hit rate limits) → create an API key - copy the key in format ifu_xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx → go to Billing → Add a card → Activate free tier → add your card - a card with zero balance works fine(!!) → set country to United States during checkout Done. 2,000,000 free tokens loaded. Plug into Claude Code or any agent stack: BASE_URL: API_KEY: ifu_XXXXXXXXXXXXXX Works with Claude Code, OpenCode, Hermes Agent, any OpenAI-compatible setup. Opus 4.8 available immediately. 2M tokens is enough for weeks of serious coding sessions.

Atenov int.

25,328 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra lost to GPT-5.5 on physics at 3× the cost! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: - A monster truck backflipping onto a parked car - A stunt car jumping six buses into a brick wall - A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water Outputs: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 32.9K tokens, $0.33 Opus 4.8: 9.2K tokens, $0.24 GPT-5.5: 12.4K tokens, $0.11 Grok 4.5: 7.0K tokens, $0.08 Sol Ultra draws just like GPT-5.5, only with more detail and it shows clearest on the bus jump where the two look almost identical. In the other tests Sol Ultra came out worse than its predecessor and the physics really got weaker. We think GPT-5.5 took the truck flip and the train outright. With Sol Ultra you basically get GPT-5.5 with weaker physics and a nicer picture for 3x the price. Newborn Grok 4.5 failed two of the three tests and only came good on the train

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra lost to GPT-5.5 on physics at 3× the cost! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: - A monster truck backflipping onto a parked car - A stunt car jumping six buses into a brick wall - A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water Outputs: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 32.9K tokens, $0.33 Opus 4.8: 9.2K tokens, $0.24 GPT-5.5: 12.4K tokens, $0.11 Grok 4.5: 7.0K tokens, $0.08 Sol Ultra draws just like GPT-5.5, only with more detail and it shows clearest on the bus jump where the two look almost identical. In the other tests Sol Ultra came out worse than its predecessor and the physics really got weaker. We think GPT-5.5 took the truck flip and the train outright. With Sol Ultra you basically get GPT-5.5 with weaker physics and a nicer picture for 3x the price. Newborn Grok 4.5 failed two of the three tests and only came good on the train

atomic.chat

897,956 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

I compared Claude Fable 5 to GPT-5.5 in this Power Rangers prompt Thing is, Fable 5 is using Low thinking effort and GPT-5.5 is using xhigh Safe to say, the results are... not even close. 5.5's output is bad across the board, from the UI to the actual voxel scene itself🥲 1st video: Claude Fable 5 (Low effort) 2nd video: GPT-5.5 (xhigh)

I compared Claude Fable 5 to GPT-5.5 in this Power Rangers prompt Thing is, Fable 5 is using Low thinking effort and GPT-5.5 is using xhigh Safe to say, the results are... not even close. 5.5's output is bad across the board, from the UI to the actual voxel scene itself🥲 1st video: Claude Fable 5 (Low effort) 2nd video: GPT-5.5 (xhigh)

Lentils

207,409 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Introducing Cognee v1.0: a major breakthrough in agentic intelligence. It is 145% better than Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 at long context memory retrieval. Cognee allows a 100 BILLION token context window 100,000x more than Claude. It's: - 6.9x cheaper than GPT 5.5 and Opus 4.8 - Cold starts in 350ms & searches in 260ms Why this matters: Today agents forget important context, redo tasks, waste tokens, and slow down as workflows get more complex. Cognee solves this. It’s not a place to build agents. It connects to the agents you’ve already built, across any platform, and makes them significantly cheaper, faster, and more accurate. Here's how it works:

Introducing Cognee v1.0: a major breakthrough in agentic intelligence. It is 145% better than Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 at long context memory retrieval. Cognee allows a 100 BILLION token context window 100,000x more than Claude. It's: - 6.9x cheaper than GPT 5.5 and Opus 4.8 - Cold starts in 350ms & searches in 260ms Why this matters: Today agents forget important context, redo tasks, waste tokens, and slow down as workflows get more complex. Cognee solves this. It’s not a place to build agents. It connects to the agents you’ve already built, across any platform, and makes them significantly cheaper, faster, and more accurate. Here's how it works:

Vasilije

847,812 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

🚨 Multi-Agent - Lite Agent Swarms - Optimize Cost On Large Agentic Loops After a lot of experimentation we have open-source AI agent swarms live!! - Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 do the planning - Deepseek flash and Gemma do the work - Perfect for multiple parallel tasks - 10x cheaper than Opus 4.8 - 2x faster and comparable performance Try prompts like - fix all known bugs in my repo, code review the last 10 PRs etc.

🚨 Multi-Agent - Lite Agent Swarms - Optimize Cost On Large Agentic Loops After a lot of experimentation we have open-source AI agent swarms live!! - Opus 4.8 and GPT 5.5 do the planning - Deepseek flash and Gemma do the work - Perfect for multiple parallel tasks - 10x cheaper than Opus 4.8 - 2x faster and comparable performance Try prompts like - fix all known bugs in my repo, code review the last 10 PRs etc.

Bindu Reddy

20,178,809 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

I never use planning mode in Codex. GPT 5.5 loves to research, so I just have a conversation and reach a pseudo-plan in chat. Then, I let it implement, maybe with a /fork beforehand to keep that plan as a revisit-able point. Probably the biggest switch coming from Claude Code

I never use planning mode in Codex. GPT 5.5 loves to research, so I just have a conversation and reach a pseudo-plan in chat. Then, I let it implement, maybe with a /fork beforehand to keep that plan as a revisit-able point. Probably the biggest switch coming from Claude Code

Ben Holmes

156,737 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

The strongest models are gated and access is granted only to a select few. Hermes Agent now exposes MoA presets as virtual models, giving you capabilities beyond the publicly available frontier: 8% higher than Opus 4.8 and 11% higher than GPT 5.5 on our upcoming benchmark.

The strongest models are gated and access is granted only to a select few. Hermes Agent now exposes MoA presets as virtual models, giving you capabilities beyond the publicly available frontier: 8% higher than Opus 4.8 and 11% higher than GPT 5.5 on our upcoming benchmark.

Nous Research

1,830,633 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Databricks is excited to partner with OpenAI on GPT-5.5, their latest frontier model. GPT-5.5 will be available in Unity AI Gateway on launch. You can use it with coding tools such as Codex, or to power your enterprise agents. GPT-5.5 is state-of-the-art on many benchmarks including OfficeQA Pro, our benchmark for evaluating grounded reasoning on enterprise tasks. We are partnering with OpenAI to co-launch on Databricks. Hear more from our co-founder Patrick Wendell and OpenAI CRO Denise Holland Dresser on GPT-5.5 in Databricks.

Databricks is excited to partner with OpenAI on GPT-5.5, their latest frontier model. GPT-5.5 will be available in Unity AI Gateway on launch. You can use it with coding tools such as Codex, or to power your enterprise agents. GPT-5.5 is state-of-the-art on many benchmarks including OfficeQA Pro, our benchmark for evaluating grounded reasoning on enterprise tasks. We are partnering with OpenAI to co-launch on Databricks. Hear more from our co-founder Patrick Wendell and OpenAI CRO Denise Holland Dresser on GPT-5.5 in Databricks.

Databricks

12,913 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Claude Fable 5 makes new things possible. I one shot a full horror game with it. One prompt. I have never seen AI output a game like this. This is the leap I've been waiting for. 80.3 on SWE-Bench Pro vs Opus 4.8 at 69.2, the biggest jump I have ever seen on that benchmark. It passed GPT 5.5 in both coding and intelligence on Artificial Analysis. I already canceled my $200 ChatGPT Pro plan. It fixed a Bridge Voice bug in one shot that GPT 5.5, Opus 4.7, and Opus 4.8 all failed to crack for 2 months. 10/10. Best model I have ever used. Full review below.

Claude Fable 5 makes new things possible. I one shot a full horror game with it. One prompt. I have never seen AI output a game like this. This is the leap I've been waiting for. 80.3 on SWE-Bench Pro vs Opus 4.8 at 69.2, the biggest jump I have ever seen on that benchmark. It passed GPT 5.5 in both coding and intelligence on Artificial Analysis. I already canceled my $200 ChatGPT Pro plan. It fixed a Bridge Voice bug in one shot that GPT 5.5, Opus 4.7, and Opus 4.8 all failed to crack for 2 months. 10/10. Best model I have ever used. Full review below.

BridgeMind

19,020 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Fable with low reasoning is roughly comparable to GPT-5.5 medium on the 20 puzzles they both solved. Fable scored higher in 14 of those, and I think Warming Tonic illustrates how different quality alchemical machines look. Solve rate isn't everything, quality is important!

Fable with low reasoning is roughly comparable to GPT-5.5 medium on the 20 puzzles they both solved. Fable scored higher in 14 of those, and I think Warming Tonic illustrates how different quality alchemical machines look. Solve rate isn't everything, quality is important!

Rob Haisfield

41,084 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

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

250,919 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Grok 4.5 is a "Wow!" moment. 🤯 > Opus 4.8 & GPT-5.5 level on benchmarks > Costs less than Sonnet 5 Is that real? Hard to believe. Added Grok 4.5 as an implementer agent in fable-advisor. It replaces Sonnet 5. Use Fable as the orchestrator and a combo of: 1. Grok 4.5 2. Opus 4.8 3. GPT-5.5 As implementer agents. Uses the Grok Build CLI so if you log in with an X premium account you don't have to pay API fees.

Grok 4.5 is a "Wow!" moment. 🤯 > Opus 4.8 & GPT-5.5 level on benchmarks > Costs less than Sonnet 5 Is that real? Hard to believe. Added Grok 4.5 as an implementer agent in fable-advisor. It replaces Sonnet 5. Use Fable as the orchestrator and a combo of: 1. Grok 4.5 2. Opus 4.8 3. GPT-5.5 As implementer agents. Uses the Grok Build CLI so if you log in with an X premium account you don't have to pay API fees.

Dan McAteer

191,306 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Are AI agents shape rotators? In this new benchmark, we let the models play campaign puzzles in Opus Magnum, a puzzle game by Zachtronics. Ironically, Claude Opus 4.8 performed poorly, being beaten by GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.5 Flash, and GLM 5.2. Claude Fable 5 crushed them all.

Are AI agents shape rotators? In this new benchmark, we let the models play campaign puzzles in Opus Magnum, a puzzle game by Zachtronics. Ironically, Claude Opus 4.8 performed poorly, being beaten by GPT-5.5, Gemini 3.5 Flash, and GLM 5.2. Claude Fable 5 crushed them all.

Rob Haisfield

499,432 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

FREE Claude Opus 4.8. FREE GPT 5.5. All free. 7,200 credits. I tested it myself - works. The platform is Gumloop(.)com. Chat interface plus connections into different services. Company raised $50M Here's the exact setup: → Register via Google OAuth or Microsoft OAuth → During onboarding, answer the questions and select every option you can → When asked to connect services, pick Apify, Semrush, and Reducto - no login needed for any of them → Skip the Slack connection → Done correctly, you land 7,200 credits minimum Models inside: Opus 4.6 through 4.8, GPT 5.3 Codex, GPT 5.4, GPT 5.5, Gemini 3 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Gemini 3.5 Flash, DeepSeek V4 Flash and Pro, Kimi K2.6. No card needed anywhere in this flow. I ran through it myself - fully working. Bookmark this before it gets patched.

FREE Claude Opus 4.8. FREE GPT 5.5. All free. 7,200 credits. I tested it myself - works. The platform is Gumloop(.)com. Chat interface plus connections into different services. Company raised $50M Here's the exact setup: → Register via Google OAuth or Microsoft OAuth → During onboarding, answer the questions and select every option you can → When asked to connect services, pick Apify, Semrush, and Reducto - no login needed for any of them → Skip the Slack connection → Done correctly, you land 7,200 credits minimum Models inside: Opus 4.6 through 4.8, GPT 5.3 Codex, GPT 5.4, GPT 5.5, Gemini 3 Flash, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Gemini 3.5 Flash, DeepSeek V4 Flash and Pro, Kimi K2.6. No card needed anywhere in this flow. I ran through it myself - fully working. Bookmark this before it gets patched.

Atenov int.

22,779 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Claude fable 5 is operating in a completely different dimension 🤯 Compared it with Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and GPT 5.5, the visual gap is insane. From 3D fluid dynamics to volumetric animation and complex physics, Fable 5 crushes the game. It’s not even close.

Claude fable 5 is operating in a completely different dimension 🤯 Compared it with Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and GPT 5.5, the visual gap is insane. From 3D fluid dynamics to volumetric animation and complex physics, Fable 5 crushes the game. It’s not even close.

GMI Cloud

320,134 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

As promised, here's my full workflow of how to vibe code 2d games like this: - PhaserJs skill for gamedev - Playwright skill for testing - Opus 4.5 / Gpt 5.2 - Claude Code / Codex CLI / Cursor Step-by-step video below👇 Source code + agent .mds + playable links in reply

As promised, here's my full workflow of how to vibe code 2d games like this: - PhaserJs skill for gamedev - Playwright skill for testing - Opus 4.5 / Gpt 5.2 - Claude Code / Codex CLI / Cursor Step-by-step video below👇 Source code + agent .mds + playable links in reply

Chong-U

180,086 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Stop saying that Opus 4.6 is better than Opus 4.8. I just tested Claude Opus 4.8 (Right) and Claude Opus 4.6 (Left) on the same exact prompt. Claude Opus 4.8 completed it in less than 2 minutes. Claude Opus 4.6 "Garnished" for over 7 minutes. Stop using Opus 4.6.

Stop saying that Opus 4.6 is better than Opus 4.8. I just tested Claude Opus 4.8 (Right) and Claude Opus 4.6 (Left) on the same exact prompt. Claude Opus 4.8 completed it in less than 2 minutes. Claude Opus 4.6 "Garnished" for over 7 minutes. Stop using Opus 4.6.

BridgeMind

53,391 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten