Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.6

openai.com

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.6

#281
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?

> does it really matter anymore? They're different models with different philosophies behind them. This is anecdotal with a user group of 1, but in my experience: Claude has a stronger personality and is more creative. If you give it vague instructions, it's better at filling in the blanks with reasonable ideas. GPT-5.5 is better at following instructions. If you know exactly what you want, it will do it without goin…

I’ve found that Claude is very literal. When I talk to 5.5 it gets what i want it to do, when I talk to Opus 4.8 it does what I say literally and doesn’t get the intent behind it.

Re: GPT-5.6

#282
post #273
post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d argue the opposite. I’ve switched back and forth from one to the other and Opus/Fable has been constantly better than any GPT in my daily work. It’s a bit slower but it does the things right, with as little code as possible, some comments where needed. Codex is faster but you always have to correct it because it got something wrong; it writes tons of code ("let me add a small helper") with obvious comments.

I really love the Opus/Fable models but I'm honestly sick to death of the buggy product. The CLI always has some weird issue. Right now it doesn't even output messages before tool calls, it just swallows them and they disappear. I don't like OpenAI as a company, but they appear to have QA, and that is probably enough to get me to switch.

There was an issue on Claude Code the other day where it would only wait 60 seconds when it had asked a set of questions, then if it didn't get a response from the user it would just continue however it thought was best. Completely unusable. It took them nearly 48 hours to merge a fix.

Re: GPT-5.6

#283

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…

Control warmth[1]

> GPT-5.6 does not become meaningfully better when prompted to be broadly friendlier or more empathetic. Instead of generic instructions such as “Be friendly and warm,” use concrete guidance: > Be direct and tactful. Acknowledge friction specifically when relevant. Avoid canned reassurance and unnecessary sign-offs.

Soo basically, my new 5.6 custom instructions: Be Jeeves and eliminate all friction from my life through immense processing power. Acknowledge friction specifically when relevant. Avoid canned reassurance and unnecessary sign-offs.

[1] https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/guides/latest-model#c...

Re: GPT-5.6

#284

"We've extended usage of Claude Fable" message incoming any day now.

They reset all usage half an hour ago. It's back to 0% per week and session. No specifically Fable related.

Re: GPT-5.6

#285
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?

I've been using Claude Code, Codex, Gemini (now Antigravity) at the same time for half year now, ever since I dipped my toe into agentic coding. I'd say in general Claude Code and Codex are equally powerful, Gemini is lagging behind. One thing I appreciate with Codex is, OpenAI nowadays sometimes just gives you quota resets you can bank, so when you use up weekly quota before the week ends, you could just reset the q…

Yes - Anthropic badly needs this same "here's a reset, use it when you want".

It's vastly better this way. Sure, it may impact the bottom line but it's a huge customer satisfaction win.

When Anthropic randomly resets me and I've only used 2%, that's worthless. When OpenAI tells me I have 3 resets available to use whenever I want - it's wonderful.

Re: GPT-5.6

#286
post #9
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?

Use a harness that doesn't lock you into a moat, like OpenCode.

Codex is open source and lets you use any model https://learn.chatgpt.com/docs/config-file/config-advanced#o...

Re: GPT-5.6

#287
post #97
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?

Codex has arguably been better than Claude Code for months now, but it's flown under the radar because it just didn't capture the same viral marketing effect and OpenAI in general has had more optics / PR issues than Anthropic amongst the online developer crowd. I use the word "better" not in the sense that the underlying GPT models are fundamentally smarter or more intelligent, but rather that as a product Codex is…

I really want a good Claude Design competitor in Codex, it's hard to use the others after getting used to it and yet I find anthropic's model to have a much worse understanding of what looks good or not than OpenAI or Google models.

Re: GPT-5.6

#288
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?

I've subscribed to ChatGPT/Codex for over a year and tried a Claude sub twice 1 month each, with a gap of several months in between.

I tried them both side by side, mostly for reviewing existing Godot/GDScript code, or sometimes generating Swift Mac apps, including converting ancient relics I wrote eons ago in Visual Basic on Windows

Codex was consistently better than Claude: https://i.imgur.com/jYawPDY.png

Besides the useless "This is good" findings while reviewing and the excessive "oops you're right" backtracking, Claude's atrocious UX and borderline "spyware" make me never want to try an Anthropic product again for a long long while.

Re: GPT-5.6

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you not read the second sentence? Obviously I know what sol is given my first language being Spanish. I'm just speaking in a general sense that it can be confusing for others. I already know plenty who had no clue what the difference between Terra and Luna would be.

My first instinct was Sol > Luna > Terra, since Sol is the farthest away, then Luna, and Terra is the closest. Size was not my first instinct. Or should Terra be the best model because its closest to people, then Luna because there have been people on it, then Sol be the worst because no human has been there?

The naming scheme is too "clever."

Re: GPT-5.6

#290

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…

do we have similar guidance or page from anthropic for claude?
Post reply on HN