GPT 4.5 is no GPT-5
We recorded 14 claims from this post. 7 were checked against evidence. 7 can’t be checked. 4 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (14)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Forecast
“Actually, at any moment, we will finally get GPT 4.5, which most certainly wouldn’t live up to expectations around GPT-5 — hence its rather tentative name.”
Our reading: GPT 4.5 will not live up to the expectations that had been set for GPT-5.
Settled before its deadline Evidence as of
Limitation: The decisive measurements are company-reported.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“GPT 4.5 is unlikely to revolutionize AI”
Our reading: GPT 4.5 is unlikely to revolutionize AI.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“In reality GPT 4.5 is unlikely to meet high expectations, per The Information:”
Our reading: GPT 4.5 is unlikely to meet high expectations.
No horizon
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“In “Deep learning is hitting a wall”, I warned that problems with reasoning and hallucination wouldn’t go away simply as a function of scaling, and they haven’t.”
Our reading: Problems with reasoning and hallucination in deep learning systems have not gone away as a function of scaling.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: Humanity's Last Exam combines knowledge and reasoning; not every wrong answer identifies a reasoning failure.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Forecast
“All this looks to be true for GPT 4.5 as well.”
Our reading: GPT 4.5 likely shows mixed results, with reasoning and hallucination problems unresolved and gains in only some domains.
No horizon
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“The truth is that scaling just isn’t producing the fruit that it once did.”
Our reading: Scaling is no longer producing the gains it once did.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The available reporting is more specific to particular projects than the claim.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“It’s not just OpenAI either; it’s the whole field, as I discussed in my own recent Fortune article:”
Our reading: Diminishing returns from scaling affect the whole AI field, not just OpenAI.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: Important underlying experiments were confidential.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“But IMHO people investing their money in Nvidia shouldn’t be looking just at quarterly reports (which might be good, since people continue to buy their gold rush shovels in bulk—for now).”
Our reading: Nvidia investors should not look only at quarterly reports.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Investors should also be looking at the prospects for “solving” AI with pure scaling, which is after all much of the vision Nvidia is selling.”
Our reading: Investors should weigh the prospects for solving AI through pure scaling, which underpins Nvidia's pitch.
No horizon
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“And for that matter people should be comparing GenAI revenue (on the order of low tens of billions per year, pre price wars) with GenAI expenditures (order half a trillion dollars to date), and doing the math, especially given the price wars induced by DeepSeek.”
Our reading: GenAI revenue is on the order of low tens of billions of dollars per year (before the price wars), while GenAI expenditures are on the order of half a trillion dollars to date.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The claim combines different periods and incompletely defined industry boundaries.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“Right now, the math for profitability doesn’t work, influence on productivity of GenAI has been minimal, and prospects for pure scaling aren’t looking great.”
Our reading: The math for generative AI profitability currently doesn't work.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: Available loss reporting is not an industry financial statement.
Assessment: UnresolvedSaid
Observation
“Right now, the math for profitability doesn’t work, influence on productivity of GenAI has been minimal, and prospects for pure scaling aren’t looking great.”
Our reading: Generative AI's influence on productivity has been minimal.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The original survey estimates were subsequently revised.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Right now, the math for profitability doesn’t work, influence on productivity of GenAI has been minimal, and prospects for pure scaling aren’t looking great.”
Our reading: Prospects for pure scaling of AI are not looking great.
No horizon
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“But minor variations seems to be all that is emerging, despite the enormous investments.”
Our reading: Despite enormous investments, recent AI releases appear to be only minor variations on earlier ones.
No horizon
Qualifier: despite enormous investments
Held from this post (4)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: None of what GPT-5 was supposed to do (blow everyone's minds, solve hallucinations, fix reasoning, maybe take over the world) has happened; instead, efforts to build GPT-5 were delayed, as Marcus predicted a year earlier.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: The basic problems of AI remain unsolved.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently