DeepSeek-R1 - Hackdot

Re:DeepSeek-R1 by torginus on Monday January 20, 2025 @01:01PM (#42771302)

Is o3 that much better than o1? It can solve that Arc-AGI benchmark thing at huge compute cost, but even with o1, the main attraction (for me) seems to me that it can spit out giant blocks of code, following huge prompts.

I'm kinda ignorant, but I'm not sure in what way is o3 better.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:DeepSeek-R1 by fsndz on Monday January 20, 2025 @02:16PM (#42772022)

yes o3 is better, but I would argue it is not yet clear for which cases it is absolutely crucial to use o3 instead of o1.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:DeepSeek-R1 by bugglebeetle on Monday January 20, 2025 @01:34PM (#42771613)

> It can solve that Arc-AGI benchmark thing at huge compute cost

Considering DeepSeek v3 trained for $5-6M and their R1 API pricing is 30x less than o1, I wouldn’t expect this to hold true for long. Also seems like OpenAI isn’t great at optimization.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:DeepSeek-R1 by Philpax on Monday January 20, 2025 @01:51PM (#42771773)

OpenAI is great at optimisation - compare the cost of -4o to -4. They just haven't optimised o3 yet.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:DeepSeek-R1 by bugglebeetle on Monday January 20, 2025 @02:11PM (#42771969)

4o is more expensive than DeepSeek-R1, so…? Even if we took your premise as true and we say they are as good as DeepSeek, this would just mean that OpenAI is wildly overcharging its users.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:DeepSeek-R1 by fsndz on Monday January 20, 2025 @04:22PM (#42773217)

now openai has no other choice than shipping a cheaper version of o1 and o3. The alternative is everyone using r1 (self hosted or via openrouter, nebius AI, together AI and co)

[ Parent | on HN ]