Comment by tedsanders
6 days ago
Not quantized. Weights are the same.
If we did change the model, we'd release it as a new model with a new name in the API (e.g., o3-turbo-2025-06-10). It would be very annoying to API customers if we ever silently changed models, so we never do this [1].
[1] `chatgpt-4o-latest` being an explicit exception
>we'd release it as a new model with a new name
Speaking of a new name. I'll donate the API credits to run a "choose a naming scheme for AI models that isn't confusing AF" for OpenAI.
Google could at least learn something from this attitude, given their recent 03-25 -> 05-06 model alias switcharoo with 0 notice :)
That is a preview / beta model with no expectation of stability. Google did nothing wrong there. No one should be using a preview model in production.
Hard disagree. Of course technically they didn't do anything explicitly against the public guidance (the checks and balances would never let them), but naming a model with a date very strongly implies immutability.
It's the same logic of why UB in C/C++ isn't a license to do whatever the compiler wants. We're humans and we operate on implications, common-sense assumptions and trust.
20 replies →
It was definitely annoying when o1 disappeared over night, my impression is that was better at some tasks than o3.