@gdb: our models are built to provide the best price for any given task. if you're able to get better price/perf on any workl…
Summary
Greg Brockman of OpenAI invites feedback on model pricing and performance via email.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/15/26, 05:56 PM
our models are built to provide the best price for any given task.
if you’re able to get better price/perf on any workload, would love to hear the details and look at it together — [email protected].
Similar Articles
@gdb: towards giving our customers the lowest price on the market for any task, as well as the highest ceiling on capability
OpenAI announced a 20% reduction in API and credit pricing for GPT-5.6 Sol for the next three months, aiming to provide lower costs and higher capability ceilings for customers.
just another benchmark: $0.34 vs $27.60 for the same tasks solved
Archestra shares their approach to benchmarking AI agents by running real customer workflows on weak models to debug product flaws, revealing that cheaper models like open-weight ones can achieve similar results at a fraction of the cost ($0.34 vs $27.60).
more models more better. one expensive model is losing to three cheap ones, and there's a paper on it
A mixture-of-agents paper (arxiv 2406.04692) shows that a committee of cheap open models can outperform GPT-4o on AlpacaEval 2.0 by leveraging decorrelated errors, and the author shares similar real-world findings where multiple cheap models catch more bugs than a single expensive model.
under 2% quality gap but 10x cost difference: tested 5 models on identical tool calling tasks[D]
A developer tested five AI models on tool calling tasks and found that cheaper models perform within 2% of expensive models like Opus, with Tencent's Hunyuan under $1.50 vs Opus's $15, leading to a daily cost reduction from $40 to $9 by routing simpler tasks to cheaper models.
@rohanpaul_ai: Surprising and such a good news for open source coding model, and also that there are lots of hidden chances to reduce …
Databricks tested GLM-5.2, an open-source coding model, and found it competes with top closed models like Claude Opus 4.8 on real enterprise code tasks while being cheaper ($1.28/task vs $1.94/task). The evaluation also highlighted Pi, a harness that reduces costs by sending less context per turn.