How do you decide a model is good enough for a given task? Right now I use Opus for planning and harder tasks and switch to sonnet for more defined tasks. But I feel like sonnet is kind of stupid and is introducing issues because it can’t grasp the larger context? Is there some definitive way to say a model is good enough for a task? Or is it all vibes?
Comments
PaulHoule•1h ago
Evaluation is harder than you think because of statistics.
Like if you want to accurately know if one model is better than another you have to test it on hundreds if not thousands of examples which are carefully graded in difficulty, not in the training sets, etc.
Practically you might try model A and model B and use each one 2-3 times on different tasks and walk out with the impression that A is really good and B sux, but it could be model A got lucky because you asked it to do things it is good at or maybe it just got lucky and got the right answer anyway.
This is a hard problem for me as well. Right now I've just been using the best model available (like Opus, or GPT 5.5, or Gemin Pro) but it's not ideal. My problem is anytime I step down the results are subtlely worse and sometimes I don't notice immediately depending on what I'm doing.
As far as Opus vs. GPT 5.5 etc, I generally decide with:
1. Code? -> Opus
2. Docs? -> GPT
3. Real-time or recent information needed? -> Gemini
It's far from perfect though. Would love to hear others thoughts.
shouvik12•22m ago
for short, stateless stuff,definitions, formatting, quick lookups I have never noticed a meaningful difference between models. But anything that requires reasoning across a lot of prior context, it's usually claude sonet or opus.
But feels like the vibe will soon take me to codex
PaulHoule•1h ago
Like if you want to accurately know if one model is better than another you have to test it on hundreds if not thousands of examples which are carefully graded in difficulty, not in the training sets, etc.
Practically you might try model A and model B and use each one 2-3 times on different tasks and walk out with the impression that A is really good and B sux, but it could be model A got lucky because you asked it to do things it is good at or maybe it just got lucky and got the right answer anyway.
See https://arxiv.org/html/2410.12972v1 and https://arxiv.org/pdf/2505.14810 -- those papers are considering a general space of tasks but you could totally do the same kind of eval for the tasks you care about.