WHAT NEW IN X11.01 SUN

X 上的 AI 合集档案 · 22 个合集 · 64,204 条

gpt-6IMAGE

五款 GPT 模型 XHigh 推理速度实测

实测显示 GPT-6.1 Sol 比 GPT-5.6 Sol 慢 4.6 倍,同时 200 美元档额度疑似减半、新增 500 美元档。

Codex Tracker (Unofficial)
@CodexResets117 天前收录原推发布于 2026.10.14
五款 GPT 模型 XHigh 推理速度实测
Codex Tracker (Unofficial) @CodexResets1原推发布于 2026.10.14
在 X 上打开原推

🚨Are we really getting cheaper models, or just slower ones? I benchmarked 5 GPT models at XHigh reasoning. Here are the results: - GPT-5.6 Sol: 102.6 tokens/s (Normal) | 168.1 (Fast) - GPT-6 Sol: 77.0 (Normal) | 117.4 (Fast) - GPT-6 Astra: 44.4 (Normal) | 65.4 (Fast) - GPT-6.1 Sol: 22.3 (Normal) | 64.2 (Fast) - GPT-6 Luna: 184.7 (Normal) | 188.5 (Fast) GPT-6.1 Sol is 4.6x slower than GPT-5.6 Sol in Normal mode, despite being marketed as 4–5x cheaper. Fast mode boosts its speed by 188%, but it still falls far behind GPT-5.6 Sol. Meanwhile, the $200/month plan has reportedly lost half its previous quota, and a $500 tier has appeared. In my experience, coding tasks that older GPT models or Claude finished in an afternoon have taken weeks with Sol 6.1 without satisfactory results. I've also seen Claude Opus 5.5 reach 300–400 tokens/s. These benchmarks don't prove intentional throttling, but the question remains: If a model is 5x cheaper but nearly 5x slower, while quotas shrink and speed costs extra, is it really a better deal? I'd love to hear whether others are seeing similar results in real-world coding and agentic workflow.

x.com/codexresets1/status/2110312726375334377采集于 2026.10.15 10:51