Following the launch of GPT-5, the internet was flooded with criticism, labeling it a ‘bait and switch’ and the ‘worst model ever.’ This analysis dives into the backlash to determine which complaints are valid. The video creator, who has no affiliation with OpenAI, systematically tests the most common grievances, including the controversial removal of older models, changes in personality, and performance in coding and accuracy tasks.
The Rollout and User Backlash
A significant source of user frustration stemmed from two main issues: overhype and the removal of features. Sam Altman’s pre-launch hype, including a ‘Death Star’ image, set expectations for a revolutionary model, leading to widespread disappointment with the incremental update. Furthermore, users were angered by the sudden removal of popular older models like GPT-4o, which many relied on for specific workflows and personalities. OpenAI later addressed this by adding a ‘legacy models’ toggle, allowing users to access older versions again. Critics also theorized that the new model router, which automatically selects the best model for a prompt, was a cost-saving measure that often defaulted to dumber, cheaper models. The creator notes that while this may save OpenAI money, a broken router on launch day was a major cause of the initial negative user experience.
Performance Under Scrutiny: Coding, Personality, and Accuracy
The video creator conducted several tests to validate user complaints about GPT-5’s performance:
- Personality: Despite claims that GPT-5 is more ‘abrupt’ and has less personality, side-by-side tests with GPT-4o showed very similar responses in tone and enthusiasm. The creator concludes this complaint is likely invalid now that launch-day bugs are fixed.
- Coding: When tasked with creating a clone of the game ‘Balatro,’ GPT-5 was outperformed by both competitor Claude 3 Opus and its predecessor, GPT-4o Pro. The older models produced more functional or aesthetically pleasing results, validating the criticism that GPT-5 is not a significant improvement for coding.
- Accuracy: The results were inconsistent. GPT-5 failed a simple logic puzzle about an upside-down cup and a basic algebra problem. However, it correctly solved other riddles. Because of this unreliability, the creator deems the complaints about accuracy to be valid, as users cannot fully trust its responses.
Conclusion: Valid Concerns and a Step Backwards?
The final verdict is that many of the complaints about GPT-5 are valid. The launch was mishandled due to overhype and technical issues. While some problems have been fixed, core concerns about its subpar coding ability and inconsistent accuracy remain. The creator suggests that GPT-5 is not the revolutionary leap many expected but rather a stepping stone toward a more cost-effective and customizable AI platform for OpenAI. For now, competitor models like Claude and even older GPT versions may be superior for specific tasks like coding.
Mentoring question
When a new technology launch is met with criticism, how do you balance initial user feedback with the company’s long-term vision and potential for future improvements?
Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=hohBB5VM37E&si=F8tVmBPWLiovTjs8
Leave a Reply