跳到正文
Rohan Paul· @rohanpaul_ai · X·· 2026-07-10AI 评分65
AI 导读

博主@thehypedotnews 测试了 GPT-5.6 Sol Pro、Claude Fable 5、Grok 4.5 和 GLM 5.2 的 Three.js 3D 场景编码能力。Sol Pro 定价 $5/M 输入、$30/M 输出,宣称 SOTA 编码。三城测试总成本:Grok 4.5 最低 $0.41,GLM 5.2 $1.45,Sol Pro $4.12,Fable 5 最高 $11.37。Sol Pro 代码经 Opus 4.8 评审:使用现代 R164 栈,但玻璃反射缺失、未做实例化合并、阴影粗糙。结论:前沿模型更擅长生成好看的第一印象而非严格遵循详细视觉工程规范,GLM 5.2 竞争力显著。

正文 · 原文

Interesting experiments by @thehypedotnews

gpt 5.6 sol pro vs claude fable 5 vs grok 4.5 vs glm 5.2

Frontier AI coding models are still much better at producing a good-looking first impression than at fully obeying a detailed visual and engineering spec.

And then, GLM 5.2 looks very competitiveness. The gap is probably shifting from raw model weights to the harness: context packing, tool routing, verifier loops, retry policy etc.

引用thehype.@thehypedotnews
gpt 5.6 sol pro vs claude fable 5 vs grok 4.5 vs glm 5.2 today @OpenAI released the gpt-5.6 family – sol (flagship), terra, luna. key facts: • sol is the new flagship, priced $5/m input and $30/m output • openai claims "more work per token" and sota coding: artificial analysis coding agent index 80, browsecomp 92.2%, osworld 2.0 62.6% • sol pro = the highest-quality chat tier for complex tasks; the family also ships an 'ultra' setting that runs 4 agents in parallel • we ran sol pro our test – 3 prompts, single-file html, three.js: 1. floating-island district of london – tower bridge, big ben, london eye, the shard, tower of london 2. floating-island district of paris – pont alexandre iii, eiffel, arc de triomphe, louvre, notre-dame 3. floating-island district of nyc – brooklyn bridge, empire state, chrysler, one wtc, flatiron, statue of liberty requirements: two square floating islands, sheer cliffs, waterfalls pouring only from drainage pipes (real stream geo, foam, spray, mist), fps fly-cam, every square meter packed with landmarks + city fabric, cinematic golden-hour sky, bloom, no ui, no text results (summed across all 3 cities): cost #1 grok 4.5 – $0.41 #2 glm 5.2 – $1.45 #3 gpt 5.6 sol pro – $4.12 #4 fable 5 – $11.37 tokens #1 grok 4.5 – 60,291 #2 fable 5 – 174,083 #3 gpt 5.6 sol pro – 241,739 #4 glm 5.2 – 243,188 lines of code #1 fable 5 – 2,830 #2 gpt 5.6 sol pro – 3,003 #3 glm 5.2 – 3,474 #4 grok 4.5 – 3,830 sol pro's code quality – reviewed by opus 4.8: upsides: - modern r164 stack, zero deprecated apis, correct color management via outputpass - instancedmesh batches thousands of skyscraper windows into single draw calls - every cliff and facade is a procedural canvas texture, no external assets - clean animate loop, no per-frame allocations downsides: - the glass reflects nothing – materials set envmapintensity 1.3–1.4 and transmission, but no scene.environment or envmap is ever created, so the spec's "reflections on glass" don't exist - the city has no instancing or merging: box() mints a fresh geometry per call and every window is its own plane mesh, so london and paris ship thousands of draw calls with instancedmesh count 0 - one 2048² shadow map is stretched across the whole 440-unit district, so shadows come out coarse and crawling. and ~58% of buildings get a random cone "pyramid" roof regardless of style while ~32% skip casting shadows outright pattern: it writes a clean, deprecation-free scene that photographs well – then skips the reflections, draw-call discipline and material depth the prompt asked for. built for the thumbnail, not the spec observations: • all four are mid – frontier "graphics" aren't best-of-the-best. prettiest is london by glm 5.2, still not ideal • bridges break everyone: fable joins two towers with chains, no roadway. sol pro opens its bascule down instead of up • sol pro floats cars with no road in nyc • sol pro trends toward simple, boxy shapes – fable too models that were "5 minutes to agi" now ship sloppy and perform at roughly glm 5.2 level. glm is closing the gap from below, and political decisions are closing it from our side follow @thehypedotnews for 24/7 ai news, analysis and breakdowns
在 X 查看被引用的帖子

来源:Rohan Paul · x.com