🔥Kimi K3.1 vs Opus 5.5: Qual é a melhor alternativa agora? — Transcript

Full transcript

1. 0:00Hey everyone, how are you doing? Claude
2. 0:023 Opus. Considered by many as one of
3. 0:07the biggest benchmarks for advanced
4. 0:09language models. But now, a competitor
5. 0:12has emerged that has truly entered the
6. 0:14fray. The Gemini 1.5 Pro came very
7. 0:16close to Opus in key tests, managed to
8. 0:19outperform its rival in some tasks,
9. 0:22especially in coding and automation,
10. 0:24and it also comes with a feature that
11. 0:27really grabs attention. It costs much
12. 0:30less. So, the discussion here isn't
13. 0:32just about which model is stronger on
14. 0:34paper. The question is to understand if
15. 0:37the Gemini 1.5 Pro has already become a
16. 0:39real alternative for those who want
17. 0:41high-level performance without paying
18. 0:43such a high price for it. And that is
19. 0:45exactly what we are going to see now.
20. 0:46Deal? So, let's get into the video.
21. 0:48Well, first of all, if you aren't
22. 0:50subscribed yet, please subscribe to the
23. 0:52channel. If you've already done that,
24. 0:54just turn on the notification bell so
25. 0:56YouTube lets you know whenever there's
26. 0:58new content here. And that happens
27. 1:00almost every day. So, let's get started
28. 1:02. In practice, Gemini 1.5 Pro enters
29. 1:05this race as a model that delivers
30. 1:07performance very close to Opus 3. With
31. 1:12strong results in coding tasks,
32. 1:14automation, and tool usage. In some
33. 1:18independent comparisons, it even
34. 1:20outperformed Opus in benchmarks linked
35. 1:22to programming and long context, which
36. 1:24shows we aren't talking about just any
37. 1:26competitor. At the same time, Opus
38. 1:29still maintains an advantage in general
39. 1:31intelligence. Broader reasoning and
40. 1:34some tests of science and advanced
41. 1:36knowledge. In other words, Opus
42. 1:39continues to be extremely strong, but
43. 1:41Gemini has stopped being a promise and
44. 1:43has become a very concrete option.
45. 1:45Let's take a look at this screen I
46. 1:47prepared for you. Look at that, the
47. 1:49alternative that reached the top. See,
48. 1:52intelligence index, three points,
49. 1:54almost at the same level, 55 points for
50. 1:57Gemini and 58 for Opus. In the general
51. 2:00index, it's not a tie, but the distance
52. 2:03is small. Cheaper API, 50%less, half
53. 2:06the price per token. For input, 2 for
54. 2:10Gemini against 4 for Opus. That's per
55. 2:15million tokens. And for output, 8 for
56. 2:18Gemini and 20 for Opus. Strong
57. 2:21programming, Gemini ahead in the
58. 2:24benchmark. In the cited evaluation,
59. 2:26Gemini scored 67%, and Opus 60%.
60. 2:30Automation competitive in agents and
61. 2:32tasks. In the automation benchmark,
62. 2:36Gemini scored 73%against 70%for Opus. A
63. 2:40small advantage, but relevant in this
64. 2:42test. Long context. And here we have a
65. 2:45tie. Both offer 1 million tokens of
66. 2:47context. It’s an important feature,
67. 2:49but not an exclusive advantage of
68. 2:51Claude. Now, where does Opus win? In
69. 2:53only a few occasions. In the LMM Arena
70. 2:56exam, Opus got 61%against 52%for Claude
71. 3:00. Performance depends, of course, on
72. 3:02the type of work. So what I want to
73. 3:05make clear here for you is that Claude
74. 3:073.5 Sonnet positions itself as a great
75. 3:10alternative to Opus. Not just for
76. 3:14performance, but also for cost. It is
77. 3:1750%cheaper than the competition. So,
78. 3:21for 90%of people who use this type of
79. 3:23model, Claude 3.5 Sonnet can indeed be
80. 3:26a great option, because it is
81. 3:28delivering top-tier performance and
82. 3:30charging much less for it. So much so
83. 3:33that people came here to X and started
84. 3:36posting some applications making
85. 3:38comparisons not only with Opus. But
86. 3:41also with GPT-4o. See an example from
87. 3:44this user here. He made a comparison
88. 3:46between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and Opus.
89. 3:49Claude spent $ 5 and took 35 minutes to
90. 3:51build the application we are about to
91. 3:53see. And Opus 3.5 spent $ 21.25. And
92. 3:59took 1:23. So, at the top here of the
93. 4:03video, Claude 3.5 Sonnet costing $ 5
94. 4:05and taking 35 minutes to deliver the
95. 4:08application. And at the bottom, Claude
96. 4:11Opus. Costing $ 21.25 and taking 1:23
97. 4:15to deliver the same task. So, from what
98. 4:19we notice here, Claude 3.5 Sonnet gets
99. 4:22very close to Opus. It put in all the
100. 4:26graphical rendering here, made the
101. 4:29control panel, and in my opinion, the
102. 4:31results here are very similar, with
103. 4:33that difference that Opus. Was much
104. 4:37more expensive and took much longer to
105. 4:39deliver the same application. See this
106. 4:42other example here in the comparison
107. 4:44between Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4o.
108. 4:47Claude 3.5 Sonnet took 10 minutes and
109. 4:50cost 95 cents. Meanwhile, GPT-4o took
110. 4:5419 minutes and cost $ 6.53. Let’s
111. 4:59take a look here. See, top part, Claude
112. 5:013.5 Sonnet, bottom part, GPT-4o. In
113. 5:05this case here, Claude 3.5 Sonnet was
114. 5:08much superior, right? The graphical
115. 5:12rendering here, the movement physics,
116. 5:14the quality of the little game is much
117. 5:16better. So, notice that it took less
118. 5:20time, spent much less, and delivered a
119. 5:21much better result. See another example
120. 5:25here also in the comparison with GPT-4o
121. 5:27. Claude 3.5 Sonnet is an absolute
122. 5:29monster. Now let’s take a look at the
123. 5:31example here. Top part, KimK 3.1 Pro
124. 5:34and bottom part, GPT6 Astra. Notice
125. 5:38that what Kim delivered is a bee with a
126. 5:40much more faithful rendering, with much
127. 5:42higher quality. What we have here in
128. 5:46the GPT6 Astra is a bee without any
129. 5:48texture, while Kim K 3.1 Pro delivered
130. 5:51this texture with much higher quality,
131. 5:53with that same detail, in less time,
132. 5:56and charging much less to perform the
133. 5:59same task. And it got so serious that
134. 6:02the folks at Moonhot AI even published
135. 6:05an article here on X showing exactly
136. 6:07what you should do to turn an idea into
137. 6:10a 3D model that you can explore. So,
138. 6:14it's a very complete article, where
139. 6:16they show the step-by-step, everything
140. 6:19you should do, which prompts need to be
141. 6:21used for you to obtain excellent
142. 6:23performance, not just within Kim K 3.1
143. 6:25Pro, but also with integrations, like
144. 6:28in the case of Blender, where you let
145. 6:30the model take over the entire task
146. 6:32inside Blender and then deliver a very
147. 6:35consistent result. So I will leave the
148. 6:37link to this article here below in the
149. 6:39description of this video so you can
150. 6:40check it out at your leisure. Well,
151. 6:42let's go, as I want to show you now
152. 6:45five applications that I did in both
153. 6:47Kimica 3.1 Pro and OPPO 5.5, and at the
154. 6:49end, I will show you how much I spent
155. 6:52to do these five tasks in both models.
156. 6:55Well, starting here with that example
157. 6:57that is already a tradition here on the
158. 6:59channel, which is the creation of a
159. 7:01webpage for my fictional real estate
160. 7:03agency called Casa Chiquic. Everyone
161. 7:05asks me for this prompt, so I will
162. 7:06leave it here below in the description
163. 7:08of this video as well. So I put it here
164. 7:10in both Kimica 3 and OPO 5.5. First,
165. 7:14here is the result obtained with Kim K
166. 7:163.1 Pro. Take a look at how it turned
167. 7:17out. So I have here a very well-made
168. 7:20hero section with a background photo
169. 7:22that was generated by the model itself.
170. 7:25Then, as I scroll down the page, I have
171. 7:27here the details of each of the
172. 7:29properties with animations when I hover
173. 7:32my mouse over the cards. So everything
174. 7:36is working perfectly with well-rendered
175. 7:39photos, text in Portuguese, perfect
176. 7:41formatting. So it delivered a very
177. 7:45satisfactory result, worthy of a
178. 7:46top-of-the-line model. Then I took this
179. 7:49same prompt and threw it into Cloud OP
180. 7:525.5. And see how the result turned out.
181. 7:55One of the disadvantages of Antropic's
182. 7:57models is that these models do not
183. 8:00natively generate images. So, even
184. 8:03using the same prompt here, see how my
185. 8:05real estate site turned out rendered
186. 8:08here by the DNROPC model. Look, it does
187. 8:11a decent job, but the images are built
188. 8:14in SVG. It doesn't have an engine to
189. 8:18create images, unless you have an API
190. 8:20key from some other model. Otherwise,
191. 8:23it will give you something that looks
192. 8:25like this. So, when I click here on
193. 8:28details, it brings me to this card
194. 8:30where I have the property details, but
195. 8:33the image isn't a real photo, it's an
196. 8:35image rendered in SVG. The site looks
197. 8:39cool, it's very well-made. I have all
198. 8:42the animations here, the transitions,
199. 8:44and the buttons are working. I can't
200. 8:46complain about that. But one drawback,
201. 8:49as I mentioned before, is that
202. 8:51Anthropic's models don't generate
203. 8:53images natively. So, if you're just
204. 8:56starting out, this might be a problem,
205. 8:58because you'll have to download this
206. 9:00code and replace the SVGs in these
207. 9:01placeholders using images you generated
208. 9:03in another model or images from the
209. 9:05internet. Now, with KimK 3.1 Pro,
210. 9:08beyond generating the page itself, it
211. 9:11can also generate the images and insert
212. 9:13those photographs into the project. So,
213. 9:17in my opinion, for this task, KimK 3.1
214. 9:19Pro outperformed OPO 5. Then, in this
215. 9:23other example, I asked KimK 3.1 Pro to
216. 9:26build an interactive hero section. As I
217. 9:29move the mouse here, I get a background
218. 9:31animation. Let me open it in Chrome so
219. 9:34we can see it better. Look how
220. 9:35interesting this is. So, as I move my
221. 9:38mouse over the guy's face here, I get
222. 9:40this animation. Look how cool. It
223. 9:43reveals something in the background. So
224. 9:46it's really cool because this was built
225. 9:48with just a single prompt and it gave
226. 9:50me this result, which I thought was
227. 9:52sensational. Then I used the same
228. 9:55prompt in OPPO 5.5 and this was the
229. 9:57result. See that it turned out very
230. 9:59similar. Look, as I move the mouse, I
231. 10:02also have the background animation here
232. 10:04. So both models delivered a very good
233. 10:07result. The difference is that Kim K
234. 10:103.1 Pro performed the same task while
235. 10:13charging much less for it. Then in this
236. 10:16other example, I used this prompt on
237. 10:18both models, Kimica 3.1 Pro and OPO 5.5
238. 10:21. Research the variations of the
239. 10:23financial market over the last three
240. 10:26months in Brazil. Then, create a
241. 10:28professional presentation with charts
242. 10:30and everything necessary to demonstrate
243. 10:33the data. The presentation should
244. 10:35contain eight pages. This was the
245. 10:38result delivered by Kimk 3.1 Pro. So, I
246. 10:42have slide number 1 here, number 2, 3,
247. 10:464, 5, 6, 7, 8. With the detail that all
248. 10:51elements here are editable. So I can
249. 10:53make these edits directly here in the
250. 10:56presentation or ask the model to make
251. 10:58these adjustments. Now let's see how
252. 11:00Claude Opus 3.5. Did. Look, same prompt
253. 11:03, different rendering. And an important
254. 11:05detail, here in Opus 3.5. I can also
255. 11:08make edits directly in the presentation
256. 11:10or ask the model to make this
257. 11:12adjustment for me. Let's see how this
258. 11:14presentation turned out in Google
259. 11:15Chrome. Look, slide number 1, 2, 3, 4,
260. 11:205, 6, 7 and 8. So, notice that even
261. 11:24though the two models took different
262. 11:26paths to create the presentation, both
263. 11:29did very well. Although this is
264. 11:32personal taste, I liked the style
265. 11:34adopted here by Claude 3.5 Sonnet more.
266. 11:37I thought it looked more like a
267. 11:39presentation made by a human than
268. 11:41something generated here by Opus 3.5.
269. 11:45But this one didn't turn out bad either
270. 11:47, it's a matter of taste. I prefer this
271. 11:49presentation that was delivered here by
272. 11:51Claude 3.5 Sonnet. Now this example
273. 11:54here turned out sensational. What did I
274. 11:56do? I came to this website here. Then
275. 11:59here you have the option to copy the
276. 12:01prompt and ask any artificial
277. 12:03intelligence model to try to replicate
278. 12:06it. So, first I put this prompt into
279. 12:08Claude 3.5 Sonnet and then into Opus
280. 12:113.5. See the result I obtained here
281. 12:14with the Moonshot AI model. I have two
282. 12:16birds here, look, that I can interact
283. 12:19with here using my mouse. Look how cool
284. 12:21this result turned out, check it out.
285. 12:23Even here, look, dark mode with the
286. 12:25rendering looking much cooler. So it
287. 12:28managed to understand exactly what was
288. 12:30in the prompt and more than that, it
289. 12:33brought me an impressive result,
290. 12:35because it was faithful not only to
291. 12:37what was written in the prompt, but
292. 12:39also the animation it delivered here
293. 12:41with a very cool result. Now let's see
294. 12:44how Opus 3.5. Did. See that the result
295. 12:48here is quite similar. Look, I have the
296. 12:50two animations here with the two birds
297. 12:53and all the controls here working
298. 12:55perfectly. So, did you see how both
299. 12:59models performed very well in executing
300. 13:01the same task? So, did you realize how
301. 13:04important this is? I have here a
302. 13:06top-of-the-line model that has just
303. 13:08been released and is neck and neck with
304. 13:11Anthropic's model, Opus 3.5. Which is
305. 13:15considered by many to be the best model
306. 13:17in the world. Now look at this last
307. 13:19example here. I copied this prompt from
308. 13:22the internet and asked Kimk 3.1 Pro to
309. 13:24create this application for me. So I
310. 13:29have a really cool graphic rendering
311. 13:31here that can even be edited in layers
312. 13:33right here inside Kimk 3.1 Pro, which I
313. 13:36thought was sensational. Look how cool
314. 13:39that is. And then it took this design
315. 13:42here, this 3D rendering, and turned it
316. 13:44into an interactive website. See what
317. 13:47Kimk 3.1 Pro delivered to me. Look,
318. 13:49I'll hit play on the animation here and
319. 13:51look how cool, everything is working
320. 13:53perfectly. Then I can choose the parts
321. 13:55it will show me here. Look how
322. 13:57interesting this is. I can increase the
323. 14:00speed here, zoom in to get a better
324. 14:02look. I have the assembly sequence here
325. 14:04. It shows exactly how this 3D figure
326. 14:07was assembled. And I can also increase
327. 14:09the speed here. Hitting play again, it
328. 14:11assembles it for me. Look how cool.
329. 14:13Here I have the mechanism it also
330. 14:15brought for me, showing how this
331. 14:17mechanism works and the parts that can
332. 14:19be printed on a 3D printer to create a
333. 14:21model like this one. And here I have
334. 14:24all the files that were used to deliver
335. 14:27this result. So I thought it turned out
336. 14:29sensational. Kimk 3.1 Pro took
337. 14:31approximately 35 minutes to deliver
338. 14:35this result to me, which I thought was
339. 14:38sensational. Not only because it first
340. 14:42created this 3D application, allowing
341. 14:44me to make all necessary adjustments
342. 14:46within the platform itself, which I
343. 14:49thought was sensational, but it also
344. 14:51took this 3D application and turned it
345. 14:53into an interactive site like the one I
346. 14:56just showed you. Then I used the same
347. 14:59prompt and ran it on Opus 5. Notice
348. 15:02here it skipped the part where I have
349. 15:04just the 3D animation for editing. It
350. 15:07already delivered the interactive site
351. 15:08to me here. Let's head over to Chrome
352. 15:10so I can show you better. Oh, I'll hit
353. 15:11play on the animation here. I can
354. 15:13control the speed here. I can also
355. 15:16explode it here, leaving the pieces
356. 15:18separated. And here I have the assembly
357. 15:20. So, as I click, it shows me part by
358. 15:24part. Notice that I don't have that
359. 15:26function here to show the assembly part
360. 15:29by part, like Kimk 3.1 Pro delivered to
361. 15:31me in the print plates, where I should
362. 15:34have the parts that can be used to
363. 15:36print a model like this one. I didn't
364. 15:39like it, because look at what it
365. 15:40delivered: just the bottom part here,
366. 15:42right? I don't have that graphical
367. 15:45rendering showing piece by piece like I
368. 15:47do in Kim K 3.1 Pro. When I click on
369. 15:50the pieces here, then it does show me
370. 15:52piece by piece, highlighting them in
371. 15:54color, and I can see the transparent
372. 15:56box here. So, look at what I managed to
373. 15:59get here with OPO 5. It wasn't bad, it
374. 16:03gave me a nice result, but the
375. 16:05application delivered here by Kim K 3.1
376. 16:07Pro, in my opinion, was much more
377. 16:09complete, right? I have many more
378. 16:12elements here than what OPO 5 offered.
379. 16:18And this part here, where I can edit
380. 16:20the model inside Kim K 3.1 Pro itself,
381. 16:22in my view, is one of the most
382. 16:24sensational things. And all of this is
383. 16:27available here inside this new menu, 3D
384. 16:29Make. So, when you click here, it
385. 16:31already brings you several examples for
386. 16:34you to use. You can add some plugins
387. 16:37here that work directly with 3D
388. 16:39rendering. So this makes the process
389. 16:43much easier and much faster, because
390. 16:45you have a system here for generating
391. 16:473D objects and figures that OPO 5.5
392. 16:49doesn't have yet. So you have a
393. 16:53dedicated section to do this inside Kim
394. 16:55K 3.1 Pro, which in my opinion won the
395. 16:57game. Now I'm going to show you how
396. 17:00much I spent on both models to make
397. 17:01these five applications. Well, starting
398. 17:03here with OPO 5. Of my 5-hour limit, I
399. 17:07used 62%, and of my weekly limit, 11%.
400. 17:12Now here in Kim K 3.1 Pro, for the same
401. 17:15five applications, only 3.88%. So, be
402. 17:19honest, which one do you prefer? Could
403. 17:22Kim really be a good alternative to
404. 17:24Cludiopus? Tell me in the comments. And
405. 17:28so you don't get lost in this big world
406. 17:30of AI, there are over 2000 videos on
407. 17:32the channel, like these two appearing
408. 17:34here, just waiting for you to
409. 17:35binge-watch, okay? See you next time.
410. 17:38Bye. Bye.