Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.6

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.6

#261

Post by financltravsty »

217 wrote: post #72
Syntaf wrote: post #6

Ok long time Claude Code user here; lately I've started to realize there's other great models out there I should be trying, but I'm hesitant to leave Claude Code behind for something new. What's the consensus today on codex vs claude code, does it really matter anymore?

Consensus itself does NOT matter, omp is objectively the best harness for power users yet it has 0 hn posts about it, zero. You're fully free to use and try anything and without caring about what others think is right

Absolutely. It's the only harness that is actually RSI and not run by idiots.

Re: GPT-5.6

#262

Post by 3371 »

Syntaf wrote: post #6

Ok long time Claude Code user here; lately I've started to realize there's other great models out there I should be trying, but I'm hesitant to leave Claude Code behind for something new. What's the consensus today on codex vs claude code, does it really matter anymore?

My experience is that Codex's auto review is extremely costly, with $20 on both sides, I can run CC with auto mode for longer than with Codex's auto review enabled. Also in my own experience Claude's usage is actually bigger than Codex, but I am not sure if that's due to I stick to 5.5 with Codex while keep Sonnet as the default to orchestrate other models in CC.

Re: GPT-5.6

#263

Post by bulder »

elAhmo wrote: post #230
minimaxir wrote: post #26

The developer's guide ( https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/latest-model ) has some interesting semantic tips for using the model: > Intent understanding: GPT-5.6 can better infer the user’s underlying goal and intended level of work without you specifying every step. Continue to state important constraints, approval boundaries, and success criteria explicitly. > Original image detail: GPT-5.6 preserves the…

> Use shorter prompts: In internal evaluations, replacing long, explicit system prompts with minimal prompts improved scores by roughly 10–15%, while reducing total tokens by 41–66% and cost by 33–67%. A shorter prompt results in half as much tokens spend? I find this very hard to believe.

If it's anywhere close to the same universe as smaller models in its behavior, a lot of time in "thinking" mode is spent on reiterating on any constraints given in a prompt. So the more constraints you give it, the more tokens it will spend going "Hold on, the prompt said I have to dot my i's and cross my t's. Let me go through my work to check that all the i's are dotted."

Re: GPT-5.6

#266

Post by minimaxir »

bigyabai wrote: post #177
jstummbillig wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you need a guide for that now? We long had to pick different models (and thinking levels) by task and feel.

The naming convention is bizarre and doesn't really mean anything to normies. Trying to pick between "Sol" and "Terra" is like asking the average person if they want the Max or the Ultra chip.

What about Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus?

Re: GPT-5.6

#267

Post by adam_arthur »

epihelix wrote: post #236
minimaxir wrote: post #26

The developer's guide ( https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/latest-model ) has some interesting semantic tips for using the model: > Intent understanding: GPT-5.6 can better infer the user’s underlying goal and intended level of work without you specifying every step. Continue to state important constraints, approval boundaries, and success criteria explicitly. > Original image detail: GPT-5.6 preserves the…

> Use shorter prompts: In internal evaluations, replacing long, explicit system prompts with minimal prompts improved scores by roughly 10–15%, while reducing total tokens by 41–66% and cost by 33–67%. When has this ever not been the case? I don't think this is a GPT 5.6 specialty!

Information density of the prompt is the most important factor in my experience.

And interestingly, LLMs seem particularly bad at writing prompts for other LLMs for this reason (you can guide them to be more dense, just speaking by default).

Conciseness is usually a byproduct of information density though.

Re: GPT-5.6

#268

Post by esafak »

vatsachak wrote: post #247
osti wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mythos probably wouldn't, otherwise they'd have included it in their release. Next version of Mythos probably will though. And yeah.. Reality has not been kind to LeCun.

Are you joking? They spend billions of dollars training LLMs to get a 7.8% on arc agi 3 whereas DINO models are near sota in image classification, provide meaningful embeddings to the point where image segmentation is just PCA. The spend on DINO cannot be more than five million (correct me if I'm wrong) JEPA is just getting started

ASI is going to be here by the time Lecun gets started.

Re: GPT-5.6

#269

Post by paxys »

asadm wrote: post #183
Jcampuzano2 wrote: post #152

I really wish there was just an easy guide on when to use Sol vs Terra vs Luna, and it just moves further into confusing territory when it comes to naming. The naming convention is especially difficult to decipher depending on what your native language is. Of course a latin language speaker might be able to easily determine oh yeah each one is slightly bigger than the other but I still think it borderlines too confus…

it's simple: unless trivial TOIL, always use the highest at ultra max settings.

Okay Richie Rich

Re: GPT-5.6

#270

Post by akmarinov »

ghostpepper wrote: post #223
WhitneyLand wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Codex is supported well on iPhone/iPad, it’s inside the ChatGPT app. It’s amazing how much work you can get done on your phone now, especially if you already have a design mapped out in your head.

I have used claude and codex extensively but only from their CLI app (heavily sandboxed using rootless podman, network filtering, etc), so I don't really know what I'm missing with the GUI apps. One killer feature that Claude has, and AFAIK Codex still lacks, is the ability to start a session in the terminal and then hand it off (actually just remotely control it), from the iOS app. Last time I tried Codex on iOS it…

They’ve addressed that. Codex in the ChatGPT app on iOS is way better than Claude Code now.

You sign in the Codex app on your Mac same on iOS and are able to completely control your sessions - fork, side chats, plugins - everything.

It’s really great i often work through it. And you can connect any number of Codex instances on any number of macs and then manage them all through the iOS app.

Post reply on HN