undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbluegatty1mo ago0 comments

You can pay 1 cent for a mediocre answer or 2 cents for a great answer.

So a lot of these things are relative.

Now if that equation plays out 20K times a day, well that's one thing, but if it's 'once a day' then the cost basis becomes irrelevant. Like the cost of staplers for the Medical Device company.

Obviously it will matter, but for development ... it's probably worth it to pay $300/mo for the best model, when the second best is $0.

For consumer AI, the math will be different ... and that will be a big deal in the long run.

0 comments

harrall1mo ago

Yeah you’re right but most people in the world do not need an agent that codes.

I think Gemini gives fine answers outside code tasks.

Outside of work, where I use Claude, Gemini is cheaper for me (for what I would use AI for) than both Claude and ChatGPT so Google gets my money.

fhub1mo ago

Right now I'll pay 2x for a subjectively 20+% better coding agent. But in a year I don't think there will be an agent that to me is subjectively 20% better amongst the big three.

viking1231mo ago

So where is the moat for these companies then, in the end will they all be almost the same from the pov of a normal person? So it's just price competition?

dzhiurgis1mo ago

Google will win, it’s becoming obvious

xnx1mo ago

> You can pay 1 cent for a mediocre answer or 2 cents for a great answer.

But Gemini is also a great answer (possibly slightly less great or more great).

When consumers cannot easily assess a product's quality, they frequently use price as a primary indicator, equating higher costs with superior quality.

andai1mo ago

Quality is Anthropic's game.

Quantity is OpenAi's.

Google's is... specialized hardware? (For now.)

Also deeper crawls, and Google Books! (Though it's unclear if they're making good use of those.)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse