Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- If deepseek operate on 80% margins as some suggested, this means that OpenAI reduced theirs from 1600% to 1200%.by ReptileMan
- Yeah, if they didn't buy up all the ram and ssd's, they would have imploded.. maybe they should have stayed public benefit/open after all...
- Are LLM companies proven to be profitable now?by aitchnyu
- Does anyone know who/what hardware serves Deepseek official for US and EU customers? And where it is located?by chvid
- Probably even higher because openai and anthropic undoubtably have the lowest cost per token generated, especially with cerebras being able to serve a million tokens every 16 minutes.by himata4113
- The margin is defined as (price-cost of goods)/(price); the highest it can be is 100%.by jsnell
- Fix headline. Reduction is for 3 months only.by jms703
- They really need to start marketing a new series of models specifically for coding. Even if it's the same model underneath, just call it something else and make it sound like some turbo coder that can run circles around claude and make it 50% cheaper for businesses. I don't have any love for openai but I don't want anthropic running away with it either, and it's clear heavy AI use is going to be in coding. Consumer use is shallow. They're trying to be Apple, and it's not working.by albatross79
- Thanks, DeepSeek. Without it, I’d be paying a lot more to those bloodsuckers.by m00dy
- Immediately checked [GitHub copilot](https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/reference/copilot-billing...) to see if I can actually afford to use sol at work now, and see it listed at 2/10, which is less than Terra. An error, maybe?by gentlewater
- “GPT-5.6 Sol is available at promotional pricing, 50% off standard rates, through September 3, 2026. The default tier is $2.00 per 1M input tokens, $0.20 per 1M cached input tokens, $2.50 per 1M cache write tokens, and $10.00 per 1M output tokens. The long context tier is $4.00 per 1M input tokens, $0.40 per 1M cached input tokens, $5.00 per 1M cache write tokens, and $15.00 per 1M output tokens.”by seb2026
- I'm not a cost expert for all the models. My usage is low enough not worry about it. However, I noticed today how expensive GPT 5.5 is. I realized GPT 5.6 was already cheaper before the price reduction and it's the newest model. I figured the newest shiny model should be pricier.
Are the older models supposed to get cheaper over time or do they stay expensive to encourage people to stop using the old stuff?
by iJohnDoe - Does this mean a commensurate increase in subscription usage limits?
- Nope.by Sabinus
- they were only able to make Sol more efficient on the API plan, but couldnt figure out how to recreate those efficiency gains on the consumer planby rjtc
- Their X post[1] indicated that they've been trying to combat reselling subscription plans via token API gateways and at the same time many, many people, myself included, have seen a drastic drop in available weekly capacity for the same amount of queries/tokens, all else being equal. So they may be trying to make subscriptions and API access more equal to each other from both ends.
1. https://xcancel.com/thsottiaux/status/2090675027670978569#m
by mrtesthah - It is absurd for the Chat Latest (chat-latest) model to now be pricier than Sol. For those who prefer a non-thinking instant model, it is the model of choice, not Sol.
Also, they have done nothing for the TTS model which remains ridiculously priced.
by OutOfHere - discounting your most valuable model 20% today without a better model in the wing ...
pushing your API subscriber base towards a competitor with an exclusive 50%, openrouter, the other day ...
slashing paying codex subscriber usage limits to the point that many are cancelling long term contracts they've had with the company ...
is altman playing 4d chess or something I'm not aware of?
because from the outside, each of these moves looks pretty bad on the face of it
- Or maybe… you know.. their margins are that high and by passing down the efficiency gains to consumer they can get market share and induce more demand?
What’s 4d chess in this?
by simianwords - Their margins are already quite high and this is a play to bleed customers from Anthropic, they will of course raise prices after IPO.by solenoid0937
- It seems that they lack a holistic strategy. All these decisions probably make sense in isolation but together they create a huge mess.
Given the increased pressure from open weight models (still 6 months behind but now more than good enough for most use cases) the frontier labs really have to step up their game.
Switching is as easy as typing /model in most harnesses so there's effectively zero moat.
by LaurensBER - > without a better model in the wing
I believe Astra is the next model beyond Sol? They used it for https://openai.com/index/ten-advances-in-mathematics/
by laichzeit0 - My personal best case scenario is that LLMs are commodotizing and that the "We'll rule the world with our frontier models" vision of OpenAI and Anthropic is not working out.
They can and probably will still be very successful but what they pitched so far is not going to work if their is any meaningful competition not too far behind.
But who knows. VC money allows them to try a lot of stuff before their eventual IPO.
by arlcode - > without a better model in the wing ...
How do you know they don’t?
> is altman playing 4d chess or something I'm not aware of?
Anthropic just removed a discount on Fable, while people are simultaneously getting sick of reading fable and opus talking about “the load bearing texture” and “color of the blanket”. It’s become excruciatingly painful to read the output during coding sessions.
Maybe it’s just good marketing.
by teruakohatu - Or put differently, when lobbying doesn’t make you competitive you have to lower your prices.by JSR_FDED
- I hope these type of dismissive comments stop in HN. OpenAI have been reducing prices since for ever so these kinda things are really the consequence of finding efficiencies and passing it down due to competition and increasing demand.by simianwords
- This is a play to grab market share from Claude, But it seems Claude code is too strong of a brand
Until the IT managers and CFOs cut budget hard, Claude will live rent free in heads of all developers
OpenAI should attack the CIO and CFOs stat
At my company we have unlimited codex and claude, still people stick to gimped claude code
- What's the deal with anthropic? Their models aren't better. They're just multiple times more expensive. We're about to disable all anthropic models because of the colleagues who waste 15$ on a opus call to write a markdown file.by on_the_train
- Not sure if I do anything wrong but Codex with Sol made such slow progress on my work, I iterated several days to do a redesign of my UI and it kept making small piecemeal changes then stopping and asking me for confirmation again and again even though I tried to get it to get bigger chunks done. Switched to Claude Code and had the redesign done in a short session within a day.
Maybe just the system prompt or my settings or the harness? Anyway, it seemed to me Codex was just deliberately being overcareful and wasting tons of tokens for a low-risk CSS / HTML refactoring with very minor breakage risk, while Claude got the job done immediately.
by ThePhysicist - Claude really doesn't have that much market share. It's the most expensive by a mile but when you count token market share they're in the low %.
And everyone else is close enough in terms of quality, their tiny advantage if any is insufficient. Let's not even talk speed.
OpenAI is competing with chinese models.