upvote

points

by Alifatisk6 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby Garlef4 hours ago|
next
[-]
Opus 4.5 is already pretty good.

Opus 4.5 is $25/m output tokens.

This is at most $6/m output tokens.

That's ~1/4 the price.

reply
upvoteby nickvec6 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I think it’s more the principle of deception that upsets people. Imagine if Apple released a new iPhone and publicly compared its specs to some previous gen Android. It’s not in good faith.
reply
upvoteby threetonesun4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
They compared their M-series chips to older Intel Macs for a while, likely to target users who were still on Intel chips. If they released a lower cost iPhone and compared it to a previous gen Android I could see the reasoning for it. It's not deception if it's a valid comparison and people just fail to understand what's being compared.

Now, is it mildly deceptive because all of the companies using incredibly confusing naming conventions for their models? Maybe!

reply
upvoteby bredren3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Apple continues to compare to prior versions of Apple Silicon. I suspect it is a mix of trying to provide useful, realistic upgrade information and numbers that still sound good for those not paying attention.

I don't think any org doing this is necessarily being deceptive, so long as there's some reasonable basis for the chosen comparable(s).

For example, comparing a new iPhone to a prior Android phone might make sense if the install base is considerably large and Apple is targeting the cohort for user acquisition. (~"These benchmarks are not for you.")

The community will always run the numbers and get the clicks for the benchmarks not filled in by the 1st party. I noticed what appeared to be some movement from Apple in content they've produced to get ahead of this with recent product content.

reply
upvoteby Alifatisk5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Why are we so quick to call it deception? Their figure is quite clear. They aren't fiddling with the graph or hiding the labels, they are clearly stating which models it compares against. But I agree on the sentiment that the standard practice should be to bench against the latest SOTA models.
reply
upvoteby patates5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Even if openly stated, why would they be comparing to a previous generation if not for deception?

Laziness? Lack of time? It's not like the latest generation of the SOTA models were released yesterday.

reply
upvoteby 5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
deleted
reply