| ▲ | jstummbillig 3 hours ago |
| That is not the "only" thing: You get access to GPT-5.4 pro. |
|
| ▲ | giwook 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Just to clarify, one does not get access to the pro model on the Pro plan? |
| |
| ▲ | carbocation 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The $20 Plus plan still exists, and does not give access to the pro model. The $200 Pro plan still exists, and does give access to the pro model. What is new is a $100 Pro plan that does give access to the pro model, with lower usage limits than the $200 Pro plan. | | |
| ▲ | dimmke 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is still worse than Anthropic's right? Because you get access to their top model even at the $20 price point | | |
| ▲ | Tiberium 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's not worse, Anthropic simply has no equivalent model (if you don't consider Mythos) of GPT 5.4 Pro. Google does though: Gemini 3.1 Deep Think. GPT 5.4 Pro is extremely slow but thorough, so it's not meant for the usual agentic work, rather for research or solving hard bugs/math problems when you provide it all the context. | | |
| ▲ | giwook 42 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I'm genuinely asking, when you say Gemini 3.1 DT is an equivalent model of GPT 5.4 Pro, is there a specific benchmark/comparison you're referring to or is this more anecdotal? And do you mean to say that you don't really use GPT 5.4 Pro unless it's for a hard bug? Curious which models you use for system design/architecture/planning vs execution of a plan/design. TIA! I'm still trying to figure out an optimal system for leveraging all of the LLMs available to us as I've just been throwing 100% of my work at Claude Code in recent months but would like to branch out. | | |
| ▲ | simianwords 36 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Pro and DT model are equivalents because - internally same architecture of best of N - not available in the code harness like Codex, only in the UI (gpt has API) - GPT-5.4 pro is extremely expensive: $30.00 input vs $180.00 output - both DT and Pro are really good at solving math problems |
|
| |
| ▲ | 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | irishcoffee 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So, reading the tea leaves, they're either losing subscribers for the $200 plan, or they're not following the same hockey stick path of growth they thought they were... maybe? Edit: I wonder if this is actually compute-bound as the impetus | | |
| ▲ | tedsanders 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Nope, it's just that a lot of people (especially those using Codex) asked us for a medium-sized $100 plan. $20 felt too restrictive and $200 felt like a big jump. Pricing strategy is always a bit of an art, without a perfect optimum for everyone: - pay-per-token makes every query feel stressful - a single plan overcharges light users and annoyingly blocks heavy users - a zillion plans are confusing / annoying to navigate and change This change mostly just adds a medium-sized plan for people doing medium-sized amounts of work. People were asking for this, and we're happy to deliver. (I work at OpenAI.) | | |
| ▲ | irishcoffee 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for the response. I tried to phrase my postulations as just that, I didn’t intend to be an accusatory. You like the job? How’s the day-to-day go? Yanking tickets or more organic? |
| |
| ▲ | alyxya 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Plenty of people wanted to spend more than $20 but less than $200 for a plan. It's long overdue IMO. |
|
| |
| ▲ | patates 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Plus plan doesn't get the pro model, which is (AFAICT) the same 5.4 model but thinks like a lot. | |
| ▲ | jgalt212 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You're trying to make words mean what we all think they mean. Stop foisting your Textualism upon us! |
|
|
| ▲ | J_Shelby_J an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Will they fix the pro model so it actually finishes the last step instead of hanging for 10-20m doing nothing? It’s only use case now is when you can walk away for an hour. |
|
| ▲ | taoh 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Does GPT-5.4 pro give a much better result in some circumstances? What're their typical uses in your experience? |
| |
| ▲ | dyauspitr 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | If you want it to deeply research something pro is great. I had a problem I just couldn’t find with my oven so I gave it a lot of information and it went off on its own for about 2 hours and then gave me what I needed to fix the problem (fan was turning off too quickly which was causing the panel to overheat). I have no idea how it figured it out and I couldn’t find anything after hours of googling so it was very impressive. I even went and googled for it once I knew what the problem was and I still couldn’t find the solution that it came up with. | | |
| ▲ | taoh 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Thanks for sharing this experience. Does it cost a lot of token in the deep analysis - which will make the $100 plan much quicker to drain all budgets. | | |
| ▲ | dyauspitr 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think it’s going to be very hard to blow through your tokens just using chat. I mostly bought the plan so I could use Codex and on the $200 a month plan I’ve basically been using it 15 hours a day almost nonstop and I don’t run out of tokens for the week. |
|
|
|
