“Some customers even wanted the old models back. Almost nobody felt satisfied.”
Our reading, the sentence that was checked:
Almost no one was satisfied with GPT-5, and some customers wanted the old models back.
Assessment: Mixed Evidence as of
Where and when Gary Marcus wrote it
Marcus on AI, OpenAI’s Waterloo? [with corrections], paragraph 26.
- Said
- Source observed
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence as of
- the cutoff for this assessment
- Assessment recorded
- assessment marcus-openais-waterloo-71964f-a2
We recorded 8 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.
The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-28. The source may have been edited after 2025-08-14. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.
What the claim commits to
- Kind
- Observation
- Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
- None stated. This site does not add one.
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Deadline state on 2026-10-29
- No horizon (the release’s reference date)
From the speaker
- Some customers even wanted the old models back
- Almost nobody felt satisfied
- GPT-5 launch (August 2025)
Our interpretation
- The claim covers reactions to GPT-5 in the week between its launch (2025-08-07) and the post (2025-08-14).
- Part A, 'some customers wanted the old models back', holds if users publicly asked for GPT-4o or other legacy models and OpenAI responded.
- Part B, 'almost nobody felt satisfied', is read plainly as satisfaction with GPT-5 being rare across its users. Clear reports of substantial satisfied user groups, such as enterprise or developer customers, would contradict it.
Counts as supported if: Reports show users demanding the old models back, and reports show dissatisfaction was near-universal, with few satisfied users.
Counts as contradicted if: Reports show that no meaningful group asked for the old models, or that substantial groups of users and customers were satisfied with GPT-5 in its launch week.
Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.
Current assessment
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Mixed
Part of the claim holds and part does not, and the record says which part is which.
Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.
- Evidence as of
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Assessment recorded
- Policy version
- 2026-10-28.7
Rationale
The first part holds. In Altman's Reddit AMA after the launch, many users called for GPT-4o's return (e1). By 2025-08-09, OpenAI said it was making GPT-4o available again (e4). The second part, 'almost nobody felt satisfied', is contradicted by launch-week reporting. On 2025-08-14, CNBC reported that Cursor, Vercel and Factory said they had made GPT-5 the default model in certain key products and tools (e2). Box's CEO said GPT-5 'has performed unbelievably well' (e3). A 2025-08-09 report said users were split on whether GPT-5 outperformed GPT-4o, with some still preferring GPT-4o (e4). These reports show groups of satisfied customers, so satisfaction was not limited to almost nobody.
Limitations
- No representative satisfaction survey of GPT-5 users from the launch week was found, so the share of satisfied users is not known.
- The satisfied customers in the evidence are named businesses and developers. The evidence does not show how consumer ChatGPT users overall felt.
- The e4 report on users being split concerns whether GPT-5 outperformed GPT-4o, not satisfaction directly.
Evidence (4 items)
Supports the claim: TechRepublic,
Many in the thread disagreed, calling for 4o’s return alongside newer models and the restoration of past perks such as unlimited usage.
Why it matters here: Shows that users asked for GPT-4o back and that OpenAI reinstated it, which supports the 'old models back' part.
- Publisher
- TechRepublic
- Kind of source
- News report
- Describes events of
- Public from
Goes against the claim: CNBC,
One week in, and startups like Cursor, Vercel, and Factory say they've already made GPT-5 the default model in certain key products and tools, touting its faster setup, better results on complex tasks, and a lower price.
Why it matters here: Several business customers were satisfied enough to make GPT-5 their default within a week, which contradicts 'almost nobody felt satisfied'.
- Where
- paragraph 6
- Publisher
- CNBC
- Kind of source
- News report
- Describes events of
- Public from
Goes against the claim: CNBC,
"GPT-5 has performed unbelievably well — certainly OpenAI's best model — and in many of our tests it's the best available," he said.
Why it matters here: A named enterprise customer expressed strong satisfaction with GPT-5 in the launch week.
- Publisher
- CNBC
- Kind of source
- News report
- Describes events of
- Public from
Context only: THE DECODER,
Users are still split on whether the standard GPT-5 chat model actually outperforms GPT-4o.
Why it matters here: Describes users as split rather than nearly all dissatisfied. It also confirms some preferred GPT-4o.
- Publisher
- THE DECODER
- Kind of source
- News report
- Describes events of
- Public from
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the sources this register covers.
: Marcus on AI, OpenAI’s Waterloo? [with corrections]
Some customers even wanted the old models back. Almost nobody felt satisfied.
- Where
- paragraph 26
- Published
- 2025-08-14
- Source observed
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Assessment versions
- Assessment marcus-openais-waterloo-71964f-a2: Current. Outcome: Mixed. Evidence as of 2026-10-28. Public date not recorded.
Recorded events
Assessment publishedBy this site
First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.