GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday

Join the discussion

• Hacker News
• Honestly they sound like pokemon game names.
  by SkiFire13
• Probably some Pokemon names might be inspired by planet names in Latin, yes.
  by embedding-shape
• ...so is it a good idea to use up all my Codex quota by Thursday in the hopes of a reset to promote GPT 5.6?
  by minimaxir
• Earlier I predicted that Fable and Sol would be of similar capability, I think I will be wrong. Here is why: there is no indication that there are any classifiers like in Fable. I think OpenAI found out how to lobotomise the model without classifiers but the tradeoff is that it is a weaker model. I wonder how people feel about that. Would you like a highly intelligent jagged model with classifiers or slightly less intelligent smooth model without classifiers?
  by simianwords
• Based on the pricing I guess GPT 5.6 is the same size as GPT 5.5.

  I would not be surprised if it is not as intelligent as the Mythos class models.

  I have seen rumors that GPT 6 may release before September. The same person also claimed that a Fable 5.1 checkpoint has been completed a few weeks ago.

  by user43928
• I find codex way more usable. It’s not pretentiously verbose like Claude. It’s also responsive - I can see the progress easily and steer the conversation. With Claude, it might take 15 minutes and I would lose patience.
  by simianwords
• I held out on OpenAI until last month because I despise Sam Altman, but using Codex is a great experience and 5.5 (medium) I'm on 20$ is very capable, follows instructions when it should and confronts me/challenges me when it should.

  UX is nicer where the agent is somehow "separated" from execution.

  by lillecarl
• Both are verbose in their own way, and both - terrible. Claude models love to throw huge blobs of text in architecture planning / interview conversations, but in not a mentally draining language. OpenAI models are more compact, but very dense & formal - they will speak in RFC language for a button that clicks and submits a form.

  So claude: 10 paragraphs of prose

  codex: 1 paragraph of jargon over jargon.

  by gck1
• The question is, launch to who …
  by yzydserd
• To everyone.
  by Tiberium
• But only for a small percentage of world's population, right?
  by egorfine
• I'm most curious about whether OpenAI finally taught its models how to design interfaces. They have been behind the other labs in this area for what feels like ages.
  by aarvin_roshin
• What do you feel is the best model for interface design right now?
  by MrBuddyCasino
• Yes. I'm really happy with frontend design of Sol (and it does scale down well to Terra!). Definitely a step change on design.
  by dannyw
• Will it be restricted as heavily as Fable? Will it come to CodeX?

  My quota is about to reset. Really can’t wait to use it.

  by linzhangrun
• Will it be available on subscription tiers? That will get me to switch away from Anthropic.
  by matheusmoreira
• Any previewers have hot takes? I've really preferred gpt-5.5 over Opus 4.8 for data analysis and scientific software work. It seems much more reliable. Fable is unusable for the type of work that I do (due to guardrails). Really looking forward to trying these new OpenAI models out.
  by ray__
• Interesting, data analysis work is the only thing I’ll use Gemini for
  by petesergeant
• I'm sorry to hear you are unable to use Fable; my partner is in the same boat and it frustrates her immensely to see what I've been able to do with it. As someone who is working with developing new linear algebra routines, Fable is so far ahead of GPT-5.5 and Opus that it's obscene. Massively better insights and far better at handling delicate corner cases without needing to mention them. I would be stunned if GPT-5.6 is at that level, but one can hope.
  by hodgehog11
• It seems comparable to Fable to me in my uses.
  by ottoboney
• For compiler work I found that Sol is noticably better than 5.5 (and I generally use OAI models because I like the Codex app), but Fable was still obviously better.
  by pavpanchekha
• Interesting to hear people like gpt-5.5. For me it feels smart only at one shot prompts, but if you try to build up session context before doing something it feels magnitudes inferior to Claude. I'm almost sure its because the thinking of previous turns is stripped with the responses API, so if I tell it to analyse something deeply, what remains of the understanding in future turns is only the short response text of that analysis
  by CjHuber
• I've been running a custom enterprise agent on 5.4 and it's been very good so far. I am looking forward to trying it with the monster model to see if we can approach some additional business cases.

  I think if you are not seeing reasonable performance in your agent loops as of 5.5, it's likely there is a deficit with how the loop, prompt or tools interact with the environment.

  by bob1029
• Coding with AI it feels like if you're not using the best model then you're possibly missing out - creating less capable, maintainable, just plain 'good' code. Why waste time using anything less than the best and cleaning up the mess later on. This is why I feel like local models and Chinese models aren't taking off (and Gemini/Grok) - they work, but they're plain just not as good as OpenAI/Anthropic. If you have the money then it doesn't make sense to code with anything else.
  by bottlepalm
• That depends entirely on how you're using AI. If you're getting it to do all the hard thinking, then sure using the best model is probably always going to be better. But it's also going to be expensive.

  Using cheaper models and using your skills and expertise from the pre-AI era can get you working just as fast. You've gotta be more specific about the work you need doing. It's less "vibes" based, but they're still effective.

  Also, Chinese models absolutely are taking off. I used Claude and GPT at work, and then I tried using some Chinese models for personal projects. I am 100% convinced they're like 90% as good for 10% of the cost. But you've basically gotta be a good developer first and know what you want and know when it's giving you shit.

  by Philip-J-Fry
• 70s thru 90s computing and even into the early 2000s every new bit of computer meant new capabilities.

  Eventually it plateaued and now you can do a decent chunk of your computing on something from 2012.

  People keep saying scaling will top out, for example. But scaling keeps stubbornly refusing. New techniques keep coming along too. It's really still exploding into existence and every new generation brings new capability. Eventually it'll clear a ceiling for your key use cases and you'll stop worrying about new models.

  It always pays to look back at history and see if you can pattern match.

  by cadamsdotcom
• Does Fable write better code or just can solve more problems?
  by armchairhacker
• There are diminishing returns, especially for more mundane tasks. Fable is nice, and I bet Sol is also nice. But there really isn't much of a difference right now when using something beyond Opus or presumably Terra for most things. They're most useful when doing greenfield, highly complex/novel tasks. When Open Source catches up, it will be more widely adopted.
  by TheCoreh
• I’ve been using mostly deepseek v4, kimi k2.6, and gpt 5.3-codex

  I sometimes chuck a few tokens to gpt 5.5 and opus 4.8 and they can sometimes solve a problem one of the other models couldn’t, but they’re not like 10x better or anything in my experience. More like 1.2x better

  by dools
• Mirror: https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2074704958419792299
  by jorisw