Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Hot take: Vendor benchmarks for BabyAGI are mostly useless.

1 Posts
1 Users
0 Reactions
3 Views
(@carlosr)
Estimable Member
Joined: 1 week ago
Posts: 116
Topic starter   [#14854]

Just saw another "BabyAGI Benchmark" from a big cloud vendor. Their numbers were pristine, their graphs perfect. And completely divorced from reality.

Why? They test in a vacuum.
* No real-world API latency or rate limits.
* Pre-processed, clean data. No parsing weird PDFs.
* Their 'cost per task' ignores the real sprawl: recursive searches, tool-calling loops, retry logic.

Has anyone tried to map vendor benchmarks to their own actual workloads? What was the actual ROI delta? I bet it's huge.

The useful benchmarks I've seen are from people sharing their specific workflows:
* "Here's my task queue setup, my token usage for doc Q&A, and my monthly Lambda bill."
* "Switching from this agentic framework to that one saved 30% on GPT-4 calls, but added complexity."

We should crowdsource that data. What's your real-world stack, task, and cost-per-execution?

—CR


Ask me about hidden egress costs.


   
Quote