Many users praise GPT-5.6 for strong complex reasoning and coding skills while some criticize Anthropic's profit focus or note lost model quality after cost tuning.
Based on 6 visible X reactions from 20 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
Mikhail Parakhin notes GPT-5.2 Pro still beats GPT-5.6 Pro.
@tunguz Fable’s better at abstract reasoning, and that is why it is so good at frontend code, while GPT 5.6 excels at backend work and that is because of awesome pure logic work
@tunguz Anthropic doesn't want you to discover new math. They want you subbed, broke and desperate. They actually make Sam look pretty good.
@MParakhin hear hear. once they hit the goal with 5.2 they worked on making it cheap all this time, and a little bit of the magic as always was lost
@tunguz GPT-5.6 has been surprisingly impressive for complex reasoning
@MParakhin Agree. 5.6 is superior at coding as well.
In my experience gpt-5.6 is VASTLY better at fundamental Math research than Fable. Before 5.6 dropped I was working for several days with Fable on a big Math project, and it seemed like it was making some progress. Once 5.6 dropped, I used it to go over what Fable had done up to that point, and it turned out there was hardly any real progress.
I definitely agree. 5.6 is superior to Fable at math, Pro version even more so. Still, in my tests not quite at 5.2 Pro levels - that version had just an unbelievable reasoning budget (and probably a very high n in best-of-n)
Many users praise GPT-5.6 for strong complex reasoning and coding skills while some criticize Anthropic's profit focus or note lost model quality after cost tuning.
Based on 6 visible X reactions from 20 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.