7 ms·
GPT-5.6 Sol, along with Terra and Luna, will launch publicly this Thursday
- elAhmo 2mo agoI know a few of my comments are related to this, but these new names are horrible. Why introduce ANOTHER layer of confusion and drop the mini, nano suffixes that people got used to? How does this go through so many layers of management at a trillion dollar company without who has a say raising this? I simply can't believe how stupid the naming scheme from OpenAI was and continues to be even after they acknowledged it earlier.
- manojlds 2mo agoBecause they want a Haiku, Sonnet, Opus equivalent I guess?
- trentor 2mo agoThe funny thing is they had the decision to go with some less or more pretentious...
- solids 2mo agoExactly, and I think the tipping point was how many times “Fable” was mentioned the last weeks
- re-thc 2mo agoThen they should have just called it Fairytale
- adammarples 2mo agoConfabulation
- gck1 2mo agoAnd the names they came up with mirror the names OAI models come up with when I try to have them suggest codenames for projects. Just lacking any sort of imagination or coherence.
- rkagerer 2mo agoso many layers of management Sounds like the source of your problem, right there.
- AussieWog93 2mo agoHonestly, "mini" and "nano" to me just seem like really awful names from a marketing perspective - they might as well call it "lobotomized crap version of GPT" and "even more lobotomized crap version of GPT". Whereas Sol/Luna/Terra reads more like "GPT for hard/medium/basic problems".
- bananaflag 2mo agoSee, you are already confused: it's Sol/Terra/Luna, descending order by diameter. One is tempted to put the Sun and the Moon before the Earth, as those are "celestial".
- rob74 2mo agoSo, Terra should work for most "down-to-earth" problems, Luna is for light-weight stuff (because less gravity?), and if you really want to burn tokens like there's no tomorrow, you go for the fusion furnace at the center of our solar system?
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- drybjed 2mo agoIt's the same issue with American and ISO date formats again. I mean, it's 8/7/2026 today, what's the problem?
- atraac 2mo agoI disagree. I needed a small text to json model that would parse basic info into a json, nothing else. I instantly knew to start with nano and if not good enough, use mini. This was obvious to me, just looking at the name. Now you have to actually know what those names mean. And I can guarantee you they'll add 5 more to create more hype, or make new names in whatever the next-gen-world-breaking-dangerous-model will be.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- mnicky 2mo agoMy theory is that they don't have Fable-class intelligence so they needed different hype vehicle :) This rename helps build excitement a bit more than just releasing ordinary GPT-5.6 increment.
- bayindirh 2mo agoI think OpenAI can also use the naming playbooks of current Intel and AMD of 2000s. Possibilities are endless: - OpenAI GPT 5.6 F5+ - OpenAI GPT5-6000FT - OpenAI GPT5-6505FS - OpenAI GPT5-6F05UL Sounds nice, looks cool. Why not?
- spider-mario 2mo agoOr NVIDIA. OpenAI GptForce 5600 XT
- bayindirh 2mo agoYou can go far beyond that: OpenAI GptForce FX6800TI Founders Edition, for example.
- re-thc 2mo ago> OpenAI can also use the naming playbooks of current Intel Past Intel had way better naming. It'd just be OpenAI GPT 5.6++++++++++++++
- satvikpendem 2mo agoBecause people weren't using the mini and nano models. Like someone else said those are awful marketing names.
- bpavuk 2mo agowell I'm using mini models and GPT-5.4-mini is better than Gemini 3.1 Pro (considerably faster in exchange for less broad world knowledge) and 3.5 Flash (that one's trash by itself)
- satvikpendem 2mo agoYou are, sure, but I wonder how many weren't due to the name. In many people's minds, it's like, why even bother with a non frontier model? Especially if they're not paying for it, via their employers' subscriptions. This new OpenAI naming changes it though, they equate Sol to Fable so people will use Terra instead which has roughly 5.5 performance, thereby saving inference for OpenAI.
- jug 2mo agoYet, in a month we'll be fine. We were fine with Anthropic naming models by music. I'm sure celestial bodies will be OK too. Larger = better. It's simple. As for the why? Marketing, making products feel "fresh", exciting, new, something alluring that we didn't have before. So, much like since industrialization. What surprises me is not this, but that OpenAI changed things up without syncing with a GPT 6.
- fwn 2mo agoI mostly used GPT-Venti for the complex part, but the documentation was done by either GPT-Grande or GPT-Tall. On a more serious note, I can vividly imagine how difficult it is to agree on a set of words that could plausibly suggest a relational meaning while remaining non-diminutive in every individual model name. Adding to the complexity, it is going to be used globally, and the main competitor already has an arguably successful, fabulous naming scheme. It sounds like a PR minefield.
- leokennis 2mo ago(At least in Europe) Toyota used to name their models "Sol", "Luna" and "Terra" as well. Sol had all the trimmings, Terra had the least. It sounded nicer than something like "Luxury" and "Basic".
- ayewo 2mo ago> Sol had all the trimmings, Terra had the least. That’s interesting. My understanding is that: Sol = Sun Terra = Earth Luna = Moon So it’s a bit surprising that in Toyota’s nomenclature, Terra is the basic trim instead of Luna.
- leokennis 2mo agoI always understood it as "the further from the (dirty/basic) Earth, the more luxurious".
- thankyoufriend 2mo agoIf you ever find out, let me know. My department at work has been renamed so many times, I don't even know our current name.
- KoolKat23 2mo agoNano and mini, which is smaller? This is a bit more clear imo. It also helps for expectations, bigger isn't necessarily better for all use cases. (Well given the limited amount of things we can deduce from a name)
- dragonwriter 2mo ago> Nano and mini, which is smaller? mini > micro (see, e.g., -skirts, -computers) micro > nano (see, SI) so, mini > nano.
- jeffybefffy519 2mo agoMarketing... that is all
- bob1029 2mo agoI've been running a custom enterprise agent on 5.4 and it's been very good so far. I am looking forward to trying it with the monster model to see if we can approach some additional business cases. I think if you are not seeing reasonable performance in your agent loops as of 5.5, it's likely there is a deficit with how the loop, prompt or tools interact with the environment.
- linzhangrun 2mo agoWill it be restricted as heavily as Fable? Will it come to CodeX? My quota is about to reset. Really can’t wait to use it.
- cbg0 2mo ago[dead]
- egorfine 2mo agoBut only for a small percentage of world's population, right?
- returnInfinity 2mo agoI think GPT 5.6 sol is pretty slow. I went back to 5.5 Though its been just 3 days I started using. Half way through the chat, GPT 5.6 Sol stops and does a safety verification, pretty annoying
- Marudhu09 2mo agoWaiting.....
- lizardking 2mo agoSharing names with cryptocurrencies from four-ish years ago, the hype cycle is nearly complete.
- small_model 2mo agoFable 5 for the planning, thinking, reasoning part, then GPT 5.5 to implement is an almost perfect combo, with Fable then reviewing GPT's code. Codex CLI just seems faster at coding than Claude Code but Fable is just a level above intelligence wise, it's truly like taking to very very very smart human. With GPT 5.6 though will be interesting to see if things flip, to have Codex speed (or faster) with Fable level intelligence is a game changer.
- throwitaway222 2mo agoIt's unclear to me if I as a $20/mo codex user will get this, and what TPS.
- thomas_witt 2mo agoI would be really interested in real life throughput. For an agentic chat situation, we are still on 5.4 - not because of the cost, but it's simply much faster than 5.5 with comparable results. Also we are using gpt-5.4-mini a lot for quick summaries, tldrs etc. In an ideal world we would upgrade 5.4 to 5.6 terra and 5.4 mini to 5.4 luna. But does somebody already have some measurements at least in terms of speed?
- matheusmoreira 2mo agoWill it be available on subscription tiers? That will get me to switch away from Anthropic.
- mhrmsn 2mo agoIs this the reason Anthropic extended use of Fable 5 via subscriptions until July 12? Seems a bit like it
- matheusmoreira 2mo agoProbably, but I think it's too little too late. Not much point to it if it's not permanent. The "get the most out of Fable until it goes away" frenzy is getting old fast. The cybersecurity blocks are very obnoxious too. If OpenAI can launch a Fable tier model that's actually usable on a subscription, then Anthropic is just going to lose, and badly.
- mhrmsn 2mo agoAgreed, this is one of the things I'm very surprised - one would think that a product like this is managed more consistently, but every few days there is another announcement or change in what the subscription can and can't do and to what extent. Same also for the announced changes around `claude -p` and Agent SDK use that were backtracked
- satvikpendem 2mo agoIt's because Anthropic doesn't have capacity while OpenAI does. People clowned Altman a couple years ago because of the massive data center build out commitments but that has proved to be quite prescient. It is why Codex has much higher, almost unlimited limits, while Claude Code rate limits hourly and weekly much more.
- ray__ 2mo agoAny previewers have hot takes? I've really preferred gpt-5.5 over Opus 4.8 for data analysis and scientific software work. It seems much more reliable. Fable is unusable for the type of work that I do (due to guardrails). Really looking forward to trying these new OpenAI models out.
- ottoboney 2mo agoIt seems comparable to Fable to me in my uses.
- wahnfrieden 2mo agoThat's great to hear - and for the same price as 5.5, and reportedly with much lower token use per task. Were you able to try Sol Ultra?
- ottoboney 2mo agoNo, my organization limits access to xhigh.
- scottmf 2mo agoWhat types of use cases?
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- hodgehog11 2mo agoI'm sorry to hear you are unable to use Fable; my partner is in the same boat and it frustrates her immensely to see what I've been able to do with it. As someone who is working with developing new linear algebra routines, Fable is so far ahead of GPT-5.5 and Opus that it's obscene. Massively better insights and far better at handling delicate corner cases without needing to mention them. I would be stunned if GPT-5.6 is at that level, but one can hope.
- CjHuber 2mo ago
- aarvin_roshin 2mo agoThoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: > It's a damn good model. Not quite as "smart" as Fable, but it is incredibly capable. Fixed all the problems I had with GPT-5.5. > It is incredibly determined. Will run for a day without even using a /goal. It understands subagents incredibly well and is great at orchestrating. It's super pleasant in use cases like OpenClaw and Hermes Agent. It knows iOS dev incredibly well. > It has rough edges too, but FAR fewer than 5.5 did. > For many things, gpt-5.6-sol will become my obvious defaults. > It is better about [following instructions] than 5.5 was. Understands intent well and hammers until it gets there. Sometimes a bit too hard. Also[^1]: > gpt-5.6-sol is world leading in computer use. It made me use it 100x more. When we lost access to 5.6, I quickly started to go insane without it [^0]: https://nitter.net/theo/status/2074708892341481755 https://nitter.net/theo/status/2074708892341481755 [^1]: https://nitter.net/theo/status/2074720467395756499 https://nitter.net/theo/status/2074720467395756499
- jeswin 2mo ago> Thoughts[^0] from Theo, who had early access: I looked at his YouTube, and found a stream of industry gossip and beginner content like "web dev tutorials". I have nothing against such content and it may be useful and good fun to watch. But does that say anything about this particular model? People have been using models effectively for web code since Gpt 3.x.
- satvikpendem 2mo agoThat's sad to see Sol not beating Fable as it was explicitly stated by OpenAI that Sol benchmarks and overall performance were better than Fable.
- xyzsparetimexyz 2mo agoThis guy is enthusiastic about everything. Not a great benchmark
- rafaelmn 2mo ago[dead]
- nullbio 2mo ago
- reassess_blind 2mo agoI’m bouncing back between Codex and Claude like a ping-pong ball. I much prefer the experience using Codex, less verbose and to-the-point I’ve found. But Fable, being as strong as it is, is a big draw for Claude right now. I’ll likely switch back to Codex if 5.6 Sol is comparable.
- ramshanker 2mo agoSame here. Late to agentic party. 1st month was Codex, 2nd Claude, already thinking 3rd will be Codex again! Since Fable will be gone soon.
- bberrry 2mo ago5.6 Sol is extremely good, definitely Fable level from my experience. With 5.6 Sol being half the price and noticeably faster I think Anthropic will find the coming months unpleasant.
- mixtureoftakes 2mo agoHow do you have access?
- satvikpendem 2mo agoOpenAI said in their initial blog post that certain organizations, probably big tech, have early preview access.
- hodgehog11 2mo agoI would be absolutely stunned if this were really the case in general given how irresponsibly large Fable is, and 5.6 Sol most definitely is not. It depends on what your problems are though, I suppose, since there are those that swear Fable is at best a minor upgrade over Opus, which has not been my experience. What type of work is this for in your experience?
- atraac 2mo agoI personally like Codex much more as vscode integration. It's actually nice to use, looks great, handles images much, much better, can even send me images in the chat to see what it's doing(my side project is based heavily on image processing), and what's most important to me is that /steer actually works. When I type something to Claude mid-task, it'll maybe acknowledge that within next few minutes, although it seems to be actually quicker last few days but still takes a minute or two, whereas Codex will almost instantly read it, switch what it's doing or answer me. It feels much more polished in some ways(though usage page in settings almost never loads for me).
- laurels-marts 2mo agoDamn this is exciting. I love that gpt models are much faster, efficient and cheaper than Claude models. They are so fast even on high/xhigh that I don’t find myself using the parallel agent setup anymore much since its cognitively less demanding to just follow along what the model is doing and most tasks it will complete in <5-<10mins anyway.
- jychang 2mo agoThis is because GPT-5.6 is just a more posttrained version of GPT-5.5, not a bigger model than GPT-5.5. It's not like how Mythos is bigger than Opus. GPT-5.6 --------> GPT-5.6 Sol GPT-5.6-mini ---> GPT-5.6 Terra GPT-5.6-nano ---> GPT-5.6 Luna Two important things to note, if you want to verify what I say/correct me: GPT-5.6 Terra actually scores worse than GPT-5.5 on many benchmarks. It's not GPT-5.5 trained with more compute; it's basically GPT-5.6-mini that's been distilled from GPT-5.6 full size. Remember, GPT-5.4-mini had almost the same benchmarks as GPT-5.2 after all. Opus 4.8 runs at ~90 tokens per second. Fable 5 runs at ~40 tokens per second on from Anthropic, because it's a bigger/slower model. A few days after the release, when the dust dies down, look at how many tokens/second GPT-5.6 Sol is running at. I will bet it's the about same as GPT-5.5, and not half the speed. (OpenAI is not incentivized to slow down the model for paying customers). But the model tokens/sec will be a big clue- if OpenAI is charging more money for the same sized model or not.
- cbg0 2mo ago> This is because GPT-5.6 is just a more posttrained version of GPT-5.5, not a bigger model than GPT-5.5. What is this very confident assumption based on?
- satvikpendem 2mo agoIf it were fully trained from scratch, you'd expect to see a major version bump. The other point releases have been fine tunes or post trains.
- 2mo ago
- aarvin_roshin 2mo agoI'm most curious about whether OpenAI finally taught its models how to design interfaces. They have been behind the other labs in this area for what feels like ages.
- dannyw 2mo agoYes. I'm really happy with frontend design of Sol (and it does scale down well to Terra!). Definitely a step change on design.
- MrBuddyCasino 2mo agoWhat do you feel is the best model for interface design right now?
- Dibes 2mo agoFor me claude is the best, hands down. Fable took it a step even further.
- mchusma 2mo agoI agree. Gemini actually is pretty good for isolated components too. But fable is much better at design than opus or gpt5.5. I have not seen as much difference elsewhere, but definitely design fable is great.
- jorisw 2mo agoMirror: https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2074704958419792299 https://xcancel.com/OpenAI/status/2074704958419792299
- yzydserd 2mo agoThe question is, launch to who …
- Tiberium 2mo agoTo everyone.
- steve-atx-7600 2mo ago"We’re expanding preview access globally now." Preview access? Not as straightforward as "launching on thursday".
- tedsanders 2mo agoI believe what the post meant to communicate is: - alpha testers will start getting access now - everyone will get access Thursday (barring banned countries / individuals) Historically, some companies and individuals have gotten alpha access before public launches, to give feedback and adapt their products to the new models. With GPT-5.6, some folks had early alpha access, but this was paused while the model was being evaluated and approved. Now, alpha access will be enabled for partners in the next two days before our wider launch. (I work at OpenAI.)
- simianwords 2mo agoI find codex way more usable. It’s not pretentiously verbose like Claude. It’s also responsive - I can see the progress easily and steer the conversation. With Claude, it might take 15 minutes and I would lose patience.
- lillecarl 2mo agoI held out on OpenAI until last month because I despise Sam Altman, but using Codex is a great experience and 5.5 (medium) I'm on 20$ is very capable, follows instructions when it should and confronts me/challenges me when it should. UX is nicer where the agent is somehow "separated" from execution.
- gck1 2mo agoBoth are verbose in their own way, and both - terrible. Claude models love to throw huge blobs of text in architecture planning / interview conversations, but in not a mentally draining language. OpenAI models are more compact, but very dense & formal - they will speak in RFC language for a button that clicks and submits a form. So claude: 10 paragraphs of prose codex: 1 paragraph of jargon over jargon.
- cbg0 2mo agoI've seen this with GPT, and I usually ask it to put together a more easy to understand document for a specific target audience or reading level and it seems to do okay.
- minimaxir 2mo ago...so is it a good idea to use up all my Codex quota by Thursday in the hopes of a reset to promote GPT 5.6?
- SkiFire13 2mo agoHonestly they sound like pokemon game names.
- embedding-shape 2mo agoProbably some Pokemon names might be inspired by planet names in Latin, yes.
- bottlepalm 2mo agoCoding with AI it feels like if you're not using the best model then you're possibly missing out - creating less capable, maintainable, just plain 'good' code. Why waste time using anything less than the best and cleaning up the mess later on. This is why I feel like local models and Chinese models aren't taking off (and Gemini/Grok) - they work, but they're plain just not as good as OpenAI/Anthropic. If you have the money then it doesn't make sense to code with anything else.
- cadamsdotcom 2mo ago70s thru 90s computing and even into the early 2000s every new bit of computer meant new capabilities. Eventually it plateaued and now you can do a decent chunk of your computing on something from 2012. People keep saying scaling will top out, for example. But scaling keeps stubbornly refusing. New techniques keep coming along too. It's really still exploding into existence and every new generation brings new capability. Eventually it'll clear a ceiling for your key use cases and you'll stop worrying about new models. It always pays to look back at history and see if you can pattern match.
- dools 2mo agoI’ve been using mostly deepseek v4, kimi k2.6, and gpt 5.3-codex I sometimes chuck a few tokens to gpt 5.5 and opus 4.8 and they can sometimes solve a problem one of the other models couldn’t, but they’re not like 10x better or anything in my experience. More like 1.2x better
- TheCoreh 2mo agoThere are diminishing returns, especially for more mundane tasks. Fable is nice, and I bet Sol is also nice. But there really isn't much of a difference right now when using something beyond Opus or presumably Terra for most things. They're most useful when doing greenfield, highly complex/novel tasks. When Open Source catches up, it will be more widely adopted.
- bottlepalm 2mo agoYea, but by the time open source catches up, the frontier will be that much more capable and you won't want to waste time babysitting less capable models. Another dimension for the fronteir to move in is speed. Codex has /fast which is great, but yea the bottleneck right now in many cases is just the time it takes these tools to complete tasks. I'm running many sessions in parallel just because I'm waiting for tasks to finish. I'm constantly round robin'ing them, and kicking them off on the next 20 minute task. If these models were faster I wouldn't need to context switch as much.
- simianwords 2mo agoEarlier I predicted that Fable and Sol would be of similar capability, I think I will be wrong. Here is why: there is no indication that there are any classifiers like in Fable. I think OpenAI found out how to lobotomise the model without classifiers but the tradeoff is that it is a weaker model. I wonder how people feel about that. Would you like a highly intelligent jagged model with classifiers or slightly less intelligent smooth model without classifiers?
- user43928 2mo agoBased on the pricing I guess GPT 5.6 is the same size as GPT 5.5. I would not be surprised if it is not as intelligent as the Mythos class models. I have seen rumors that GPT 6 may release before September. The same person also claimed that a Fable 5.1 checkpoint has been completed a few weeks ago.