| ▲ | Jcampuzano2 2 hours ago |
| I really wish there was just an easy guide on when to use Sol vs Terra vs Luna, and it just moves further into confusing territory when it comes to naming. The naming convention is especially difficult to decipher depending on what your native language is. Of course a latin language speaker might be able to easily determine oh yeah each one is slightly bigger than the other but I still think it borderlines too confusing. That aside all the numbers look amazing, and I'll be happy to probably main this alongside grok-4.5 for a while comparing the two on price and efficiency. I vastly prefer the direction that OpenAI seems to be going with token efficiency and performance compared to Anthropic who seems to be moving towards a world where you just token-max as much as possible ignoring any and all costs. |
|
| ▲ | jrflo 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| My guess is that it's the same for Haiku/Sonnet/Opus: Biggest model for architecture and high level planning and technically challenging problems, medium model for simple implementation tasks, small model is for nothing |
|
| ▲ | jstummbillig 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why would you need a guide for that now? We long had to pick different models (and thinking levels) by task and feel. |
| |
| ▲ | Jcampuzano2 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Previously it was much more obvious which model to reach for depending on your use case because they had the mini and nano naming conventions. Getting rid of that seems like a step back. Just a personal nit though. I've seen buzz about this elsewhere as well but to me effort levels seem more like spend limits disguised with another word. I don't think they should even exist. | |
| ▲ | aerhardt an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | My guide was to pick the best model on "High" for 99% of tasks. | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The naming convention is bizarre and doesn't really mean anything to normies. Trying to pick between "Sol" and "Terra" is like asking the average person if they want the Max or the Ultra chip. | | |
| ▲ | minimaxir 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | What about Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus? | |
| ▲ | slekker 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The sun is bigger than earth which is bigger than the moon, it's pretty simple really | | |
| ▲ | bigyabai 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Which is cheaper to use? The size euphemism is a really roundabout description vs "Nano" and "Pro" for the layperson. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | asadm 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| it's simple: unless trivial TOIL, always use the highest at ultra max settings. |
| |
|
| ▲ | taytus 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You don’t know what sol means? You don’t understand the difference in sizes between Terra and sol? I’m genuinely asking. |
| |
| ▲ | Someone1234 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That isn't what "genuinely asking" looks like, you're criticizing using "questions" as cover. It isn't subtle, nor is it constructive. I agree with them, Sol, Terra, and Luna are confusing names. They mean the same thing as GPT-5.6-Max, GPT-5.6-Plus, and GPT-5.6-Fast but require base knowledge for an analogy. It feels like it was adding by the marketing department. | | |
| ▲ | HarHarVeryFunny a minute ago | parent | next [-] | | Surely it's size based: Sun (Sol) > Earth (Terra) > Moon (Luna) Similar to Anthropic's size/length based naming: Opus > Sonnet > Haiku These names seem easy to understand to me, and much clearer than suffixes like -max and -plus. | |
| ▲ | LUmBULtERA an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | >They mean the same thing as GPT-5.6-Max, GPT-5.6-Plus, and GPT-5.6-Fast but require base knowledge for an analogy. But do they though? When do you use GPT-5.6-Max-Low vs. GPT-5.6-Plus High? Or GPT-5.6-Fast-Xhigh? What's the Pareto optimal choice (outcome and price)? According to the benches it seems to bop around and the even if the benches are accurate the best choice isn't always consistent. | | |
| ▲ | Someone1234 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > When do you use GPT-5.6-Max-Low vs. GPT-5.6-Plus High? You don't, because that isn't something I proposed using for model naming. I called them GPT-5.6-Max, GPT-5.6-Plus, and GPT-5.6-Fast. Reasoning levels are distinct from the model design itself, and the UI makes that clear. Plus, using that same flawed argument this would be called GPT-5.6-Sol-Low or GPT-5.6-Luna-High which also makes no sense/is confusing. So that argument applies (or more accurately doesn't), no matter the model names. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Jcampuzano2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Did you not read the second sentence? Obviously I know what sol is given my first language being Spanish. I'm just speaking in a general sense that it can be confusing for others. I already know plenty who had no clue what the difference between Terra and Luna would be. | | |
| ▲ | ealready_value 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | My first instinct was Sol > Luna > Terra, since Sol is the farthest away, then Luna, and Terra is the closest. Size was not my first instinct. Or should Terra be the best model because its closest to people, then Luna because there have been people on it, then Sol be the worst because no human has been there? | | |
| |
| ▲ | adamrezich 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Sure—so, is Sol 109.2x better than Terra? Or 1.304x10^6 better? |
|
