No... sigmoid10 was comparing with o1 (not o1-pro), which is accessible for $20/mo, not $200/mo. So, the "Elon factor" in your math is +$20/user/month (2x) for barely any difference in performance (a hard sell), not -$160/user/month, and while we have no clear answer to whether either of them are making a profit at that price, it would be surprising if OpenAI Plus users were not profitable, given the reasonable rate limits OpenAI imposes on o1 access, and the fact that most Plus users probably aren't maxing out their rate limits anyways. o1-pro requires vastly more compute than o1 for each query, and OpenAI was providing effectively unlimited access to o1-pro to Pro users, with users who want tons of queries gravitating to that subscription. The combination of those factors is certainly why Sam Altman claimed they weren't making money on Pro users.
lmarena has also become less and less useful over time for comparing frontier models as all frontier models are able to saturate the performance needed for the kind of casual questions typically asked there. For the harder questions, o1 (not even o1-pro) still appears to be tied for 1st place with several other models... which is yet another indication of just how saturated that benchmark is.
The comment I was replying to had replied to an lmarena benchmark link. Perhaps you think that person should have replied to someone else? And, if you want to finish the quote, Karpathy's opinion on this is subjective. He admits it isn't a "real" evaluation.
"[...] though of course we need actual, real evaluations to look at."
His own tests are better than nothing, but hardly definitive.
Yes, numpad0 did... but I was pointing out that this choice was illogical. The lmarena results they were replying to only supported a comparison against o1, since o1 effectively matches Grok 3 on the benchmark being replied to (with o1-pro nowhere to be found), and then they immediately leapt into a bunch of weird value-proposition math. As I said, perhaps you think they should have replied to someone else? Replying to an lmarena benchmark indicates that numpad0 was using that benchmark as part of the justification of their math. I also pointed out the limitations of lmarena as a benchmark for frontier models.
I don't think anyone is arguing that ChatGPT Pro is a good value unless you absolutely need to bypass the rate limits all the time, and I cannot find a single indication that Premium+ has unlimited access to Grok 3. If Premium+ doesn't have unlimited rate limits, then it's definitely not comparable to ChatGPT Pro, and other than one subjective comment by Karpathy, we have no benchmarks that indicate that Grok 3 might be as good as o1-pro. You already get 99% of the value with just ChatGPT Plus compared to ChatGPT Pro for half the price of Premium+.
numpad0 was effectively making a strawman argument by ignoring ChatGPT Plus here... it is very easy for anyone to beat up a strawman, so I am here to point out a bad argument when I see one.
You're the one that came in and told him about the "factor in your math". Like you said, it's his comparison, not yours. If you want to do your own comparison, feel free. But don't come in and tell him he's not allowed to do his comparison. I for one like is comparison.
lmarena has also become less and less useful over time for comparing frontier models as all frontier models are able to saturate the performance needed for the kind of casual questions typically asked there. For the harder questions, o1 (not even o1-pro) still appears to be tied for 1st place with several other models... which is yet another indication of just how saturated that benchmark is.