WhoBuilt

GPT-4.5 = Big Model Energy

Mar 11, 2025· 8 min· 31K views·Watch on YouTube

An unnamed Y Combinator presenter explains what GPT-4.5 offers, where it falls short, and how it may fit into OpenAI’s future models.

From GPT-4 to GPT-4.5

After GPT-4 arrived in 2023, expectations grew for GPT-5, while rumors about projects called Strawberry and Orion circulated. OpenAI released o1 in December, introducing a reasoning-focused model that outperformed GPT-4 on math, coding, and logic. Orion became GPT-4.5, a much larger model built by scaling pretraining and post-training.

Strengths in conversation and creativity

OpenAI researchers describe GPT-4.5 as better at understanding what people mean and having nuanced conversations. It scored 61.9% on SimpleQA, compared with GPT-4o’s 38.4%, and its reported hallucination rate was 37%, versus 61.2% for GPT-4o. The presenter says it also performs well at writing, storytelling, humor, and brainstorming.

Evaluating subjective qualities

The presenter says GPT-4.5 performed better on softer tasks in internal testing, with some evaluation relying on human feedback and subjective judgment. Researchers asked testers where it improved or regressed and used their feedback to guide alignment. Because writing quality and emotional intelligence are difficult to measure consistently, OpenAI wants public users to try the model and share their impressions.

Cost, limits, and the next model generation

GPT-4.5 costs 30 times more per input token and 15 times more per output token than GPT-4o, making it difficult to justify for large-scale deployment. It also trails reasoning-focused models such as o1 on complex STEM, advanced math, and difficult coding tasks. The presenter argues that broad pretraining and inference-time reasoning can complement each other, and describes GPT-4.5 as a bridge toward models that combine both.

Takeaways

  • Compare model quality against task-specific needs, especially when costs differ sharply.
  • GPT-4.5 may suit creative work and general inquiries better than demanding structured reasoning.
  • Treat subjective quality claims as context-dependent and test them with representative users.
  • Pretraining and inference-time reasoning may provide complementary capabilities in future models.

Mentioned in this talk

Search inside this talk

What was claimed 9

Related talks