Hacker News Reader

Comment by fswd | Hacker News Reader

It's $3.80 for the full 1000 prompt tokens plus 32k token long context. But OpenAI doesn't have a monopoly on long context, RWKV is free and open source and has virtually an unlimited context (as long as you remind it every once and a while). However ChatGPT really cannot be matched at this point perhaps except LLaMa Alpaca 7B

EDIT: I accidentially typed Alpine, it's Alpaca. https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca

View on HN

There is also https://open-assistant.io by LAION.

Alpaca is supposed to be roughly comparable to GPT-3.5, which means it is probably far worse than GPT-4.

But also gpt-3.5-turbo is far worse than davinci-003.

By what metric? For most stuff 3.5 is better in my experience. Assuming you are trying to complete an actual task rather than have fun.

I've tried to make an assistant with ChatGPT, because it's cheaper, and it's abysmally worse than davinci-003 at following instructions and reasoning.

3.5-turbo is already worse than 3.5-legacy, you can try this with chatgpt plus. Use the normal (turbo) model and then use the legacy model, you will almost certainly feel a difference in quality

Turbo prioritizes speed (probably due to cost?), the legacy model has far higher quality of output. You can confirm this on Reddit where none of the chatgpt plus userbase seems happy with turbo and the general recommendation is to switch it back to legacy.

I tried porting a mini project from davinci to the new turbo api and quickly reverted it, turbo output is a lot more all over the place and very hard to get into something useful. It’s a fun chatbot though and still great for simple tasks

You get what you pay for, and there’s a reason 3.5-turbo is so cheap

Reply on news.ycombinator.com