Reasoning AI Models: The Overthinkers of the AI World?

In partnership with

Build Smarter, Faster: AI Voice Agents for Every Industry

Save time building your AI calling assistant with Synthflow’s AI Voice Agent templates—pre-built, pre-tested, and ready for industries like real estate and healthcare. Get started fast with features like lead qualification and real-time booking. You can even create and sell your own templates to earn commissions!

Register Now

AI has a new obsession: reasoning models. Think of them as the overachievers of artificial intelligence, trying to solve the world’s hardest problems while also double-checking their homework. OpenAI’s “o1” kicked off the craze, and now everyone’s piling in — DeepSeek, Alibaba, and probably a startup in your garage. But are these models brilliant problem-solvers or just overly complicated show-offs?

A New Era or Just New Packaging?

Reasoning models have been billed as the next frontier in AI, designed to think deeper, solve tougher problems, and avoid the embarrassing errors their predecessors make. OpenAI claims that o1 represents a “step change” in generative AI. Translation? It’s supposed to be smarter, sharper, and more reliable.

But let’s not pop the champagne just yet. These models are pricy. OpenAI’s o1 costs up to 4x more than its non-reasoning cousin, GPT-4o. The premium version, o1 Pro Mode, comes with a jaw-dropping $2,400-a-year subscription. That’s enough to make even the most enthusiastic techie pause.

Why so expensive? Well, reasoning models don’t just spit out answers; they second-guess themselves, recheck their work, and take longer to deliver results. Imagine hiring a detective who takes weeks to solve a case because they keep re-reading the clues. Sure, the solution might be accurate, but at what cost?

Not Exactly AI Einstein

Despite the hype, reasoning models aren’t infallible. In fact, they stumble over some surprisingly basic stuff. o1, for example, struggles with simple math problems — not exactly a reassuring feature for a machine that’s supposed to be “reasoning.” And while these models are better at specific tasks, they’re not what you’d call generalists. If the problem isn’t within their training data, you might as well be talking to a chatbot from 2015.

Costa Huang, a researcher at Ai2, bluntly points out that these models are “specialized” and prone to underperformance outside of their narrow domains. And UCLA’s Guy Van Den Broeck adds that these systems don’t actually “reason” in the human sense. They’re more like really good pattern matchers — impressive, sure, but not groundbreaking.

Why All the Fuss?

So, why are AI labs racing to build reasoning models if they’re this finicky? Simple: it’s the tech world’s latest gold rush. The global AI market is projected to hit $1.81 trillion by 2030, and reasoning models are the shiny new pickaxes everyone wants to sell.

But this rush comes with risks. Big labs like OpenAI are notoriously secretive about their work, which means independent researchers and smaller players are locked out. As Ameet Talwalkar from Carnegie Mellon warns, the lack of transparency could stifle broader innovation, leaving the field dominated by a handful of corporate giants.

The Future of Reasoning AI

For now, reasoning models are a mix of promise and potential pitfalls. They’re expensive, niche, and not as versatile as they’re marketed to be. But with time — and a lot of investment — they could deliver breakthroughs in fields like medicine, climate science, and materials engineering. Imagine an AI that takes weeks to think through a problem but discovers a cure for cancer. Worth it, right?

Still, as the industry charges forward, it’s worth asking: are we chasing genuine progress, or just a shinier version of AI that still makes mistakes — but charges you more for them?

The reasoning renaissance is here, for better or worse. Let’s just hope these models learn how to reason before they drain everyone’s wallets.