HackerLangs
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

XCSme

2,810 カルマ登録 12 年前
Building self-hosted web analytics.

Self-Hosted Analytics with Heatmaps and Session Recordings: https://www.uxwizz.com

WordPress Analytics: https://www.wplytic.com

X (Twitter): @XCSme

投稿

Show HN: One hundred LLMs Generating a HTML/CSS Solar System

aibenchy.com
5 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·23 日前·1 コメント

MariaDB now has a DuckDB storage engine

mariadb.org
2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·23 日前·0 コメント

SVG of a Hamster Playing Table-Tennis

aibenchy.com
21 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·先月·18 コメント

[untitled]

2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·2 か月前·0 コメント

Tell HN: Gemini 3.5 Flash breaks in stupid ways

9 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·2 か月前·4 コメント

Cisco Announces End of Life for Smartlook

uxwizz.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·2 か月前·1 コメント

Ask HN: Are MiniMax Models Scams?

3 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·4 か月前·2 コメント

Grok 4.20 brings minimal improvements over Grok-4.1-fast

aibenchy.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·4 か月前·1 コメント

Why Not Boost?

twitter.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·4 か月前·1 コメント

Show HN: AI Benchy – AI benchmarks and comparisons

aibenchy.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·4 か月前·0 コメント

PostHog now shares hashed emails of new users with Reddit and LinkedIn

uxwizz.com
4 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·4 か月前·2 コメント

Show HN: AIBenchy – Independent AI Leaderboard

aibenchy.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·5 か月前·1 コメント

Mailchimp Free Plan Changes

softuts.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·6 か月前·0 コメント

InvokeAI Commercial Platform Shuts Down, Open-Source Project Continues

softuts.com
2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·6 か月前·2 コメント

Prevent others sending emails using your domain name

uxwizz.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·6 か月前·2 コメント

[untitled]

1 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·7 か月前·0 コメント

LanguageTool browser extension is no longer free

languagetool.org
2 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·7 か月前·1 コメント

Does anyone run ads successfully?

3 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·8 か月前·3 コメント

Hetzner Servers Benchmark

softuts.com
4 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·8 か月前·1 コメント

N8n added native persistent storage with DataTables

community.n8n.io
174 ポイント·投稿者 XCSme·9 か月前·106 コメント

コメント

XCSme
·21 時間前·議論
And in my tests, that point of "overthinking" depends on the problem's complexity, so it's not necessarily that using "xhigh" is always bad or good.
XCSme
·21 時間前·議論
One example where the order seems correct, is this SVG generation test:

https://aibenchy.com/showcase/?q=Gemini+3.5%2Cgpt+5.6%2C+5.3...

You can see that most Gemini 3.5 generations are more correct than 5.6 Sol (the net is in the middle of the table, hamster seems reasonable and not deformed, etc.)
XCSme
·21 時間前·議論
It's because the benchmark is not coding-only.

Gemini models tend to have most knowledge for most domains, and are one of the most intelligent overall. You can check other benchmarks too, on specific categories, those models still beat other SOTA models.

Regarding Opus, Anthropic models often fail to follow instructions, formatting requirements or simply refuse to answer questions (i.e. Fable).

The issue with Gemini models is that they are not as good as using tools or go into weird failure modes when coding or trying to extract/generate specific data. They work amazing, until they don't...
XCSme
·昨日·議論
In my tests, in almost all cases, using Sol on (low) reasoning is the best option intelligence/price-wise.

Luna is good too, for classification tasks or any pre-processing task that is not critical
XCSme
·昨日·議論
Also for most, there doesn't seem to be a big difference between (medium) and (high).
XCSme
·昨日·議論
Yeah, for some reason the (low) versions do really well, like they think directly of the solution instead of going around all the edge-cases and getting lost in one of them.
XCSme
·昨日·議論
Here's all 3 (medium), and GPT-5.5

It GPT-5.6 doesn't seem to be a lot smarter than 5.5, but it is faster, cheaper, more efficient and more consistent:

https://aibenchy.com/compare/openai-gpt-5-6-sol-medium/opena...
XCSme
·昨日·議論
Not always, in some cases, changing to a higher reasoning makes the AI doubt itself too much, and skip over the correct answer by overcomplicating the problem and polluting the context.

It would be nice to see on which categories of problems the extra thinking makes it better and on which it makes it worse.
XCSme
·昨日·議論
GPT-5.6 is a really good model, and quite cheap. I can finally replace GPT-5.3-Codex for my Tool Calling in n8n.

Here's my benchmark results for GPT-5.6:

https://aibenchy.com/?q=gpt-5.6

(the high reasoning variants are still running, uploading them soon too)

EDIT: The high variants are there too, enjoy the hamsters[0].

[0]: https://aibenchy.com/showcase/?q=gpt-5.6
XCSme
·一昨日·議論
What would the advantage be?
XCSme
·一昨日·議論
Hamsters are also getting better, but still quite off compared to SOTA models:

https://aibenchy.com/showcase/?q=grok
XCSme
·一昨日·議論
I am trying to benchmark it now, but:

    - It doesn't seem available in EU (?)
    - Using a VPN seems to sort of fix it, but it's way slower than I expected, when everyone was praising it, it feels like the speed is slowly ramping up
    - Cost is $2/$6 for <200k context only, above that, cost is $4/$12
    - GLM-5.2 still seems smarter, faster and much cheaper: 
https://aibenchy.com/compare/x-ai-grok-4-5-medium/z-ai-glm-5...
XCSme
·一昨日·議論
I often use Gemini as my "chat" app to ask questions, etc.

I stopped using ChatGPT because of they're weird login system, where it keeps switching to my Workspace Codex account, which doesn't actually have the free/chat functionality.

I usually just switch between gemini/grok when asking questions or to research something online.
XCSme
·8 日前·議論
I spent 30mins debugging why my Github Pages were serving old versions...

It has been down for at least 2 hours, with actions not being executed. I can not finalize my deployment because of this outage, so now I have to delay my table-tennis training to wait for the Actions to be available again before I can complete the deployment :(
XCSme
·10 日前·議論
It is on top for many benchmarks, only not the coding/agentic ones.

Still one of the most intelligent models overall, most likely to get any question you ask correctly (without tools).
XCSme
·10 日前·議論
What's interesting, is that Sonnet 5 is actually worse[0] than 4.6 without reasoning.

It makes some sense, as models are trained more and more with reasoning, than without.

[0]: https://aibenchy.com/compare/anthropic-claude-sonnet-4-6-non...
XCSme
·10 日前·議論
Well, it is a Sonnet model, it is indeed better[0] than Sonnet 4.6 (smarter, faster, cheaper), but I don't see why would you use it as opposed to Opus 4.8 low or GLM-5.2...

[0]: https://aibenchy.com/compare/anthropic-claude-sonnet-4-6-med...
XCSme
·10 日前·議論
As always, note: faster than GLM-5.2 doesn't mean too much, as GLM-5.2 is served by different providers, so the inference speed can vary drastically between providers or over time.
XCSme
·10 日前·議論
I just tested it on my benchmarks[0], it's GLM-5.2 level, at 2x cost, but also 2x faster.

Weak spots (categories it fails):

    - Trivia — 0/3 - basically not much built-in knowledge
    - Combined tool-calling tasks — score 45/100, sometimes makes invalid tool calls
    - Puzzle Solving — score 77, flubs carwash-like tests
[0]: https://aibenchy.com/compare/anthropic-claude-sonnet-4-6-med...
XCSme
·11 日前·議論
Considering the cloud version, all three models compared in the article (Qwen 3.6 35BA3b, 3.6 27B and DeepSeek V4 Flash), have very similar performance[0], BUT on cloud, for some reason DeepSeek V4 Flash is 10-20x cheaper than the Qwen models.

If Qwen models are so much easier to run, why are the providers charging more than V4 Flash?

[0]: https://aibenchy.com/compare/qwen-qwen3-6-35b-a3b-medium/qwe... <-- compare how the three models draw hamsters svgs, lol