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

781–790 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-5.6

#781

Post by pkulak »

InsideOutSanta wrote: post #244
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?

> 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 wish models called me out more! I can’t count the number of times I’ve had an absolute shit plan, prompted it, and the model built it to a tee. Then I look at the code, and it’s an absolute mess, because it had to make my stupid idea work. Maybe I need a better system prompt.

Re: GPT-5.6

#782

Post by threatripper »

pupppet wrote: post #450
simonw wrote: post #379

Here are 18 pelicans - six each for Luna, Terra and Sol at the six different reasoning effort levels (plus the price to generate each one): https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2026/gpt-5.6-pelican... Or if you want to see some in 3D, OpenAI featured a pelican riding a tricycle, bicycle, pony and another pelican in their livestream this morning: https://www.youtube.com/live/Wq45rvPGNHs?t=1070s

Time to dump this test. Probably not a coincidence every version has the same rolling green hills, gradient blue sky, sun in the corner, etc.

Waiting for the AMA on Reddit "Ten years ago I was responsible for the pelican department at OpenAI, AMA"

Re: GPT-5.6

#783

Post by jatora »

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?

Codex has been comparable for a while. 5.1-5.5 have competed closely with 4.5-4.8. Fable blew them all out, now Sol comparable to Fable again. Some slight tooling differences with skills and hooks but for the most part I think if people are so engineered into one CLI that swapping to another inhibits them, then that is an error in usage habits.

Codex historically will follow tasks more closely with less creativity, whereas Opus will do more than you specify. I wouldnt consider either one better due to this fact, just makes them useful for different situations. Generally they'll perform similarly for most tasks.

Opus and Fable dominate 5.5 in artistic design (pixel art, ascii art), and edge out 5.5 slightly in general UI design taste. Have not tested Sol in that regard yet.

So far in my usage Sol has been superior to Fable at graphics rendering engine optimization.

Codex will work longer, and in single sessions without as much subagent usage.

Codex only has 256k context but its compaction is absolutely next level. You will not notice compactions and they will happen multiple times during a complex task or set of tasks without you ever having to notice or care. Claude code on the other hand still has fairly poor compaction.

Codex has more generous usage limits, and they also give you usage resets (weekly+5h resets) that you can bank for a month or so. Not sure how often they give these out.

Codex also seemingly never has outages or weird delays like Claude code does.

OpenAI randomly resets usage just like Anthropic does

I would use both if you code often

Re: GPT-5.6

#784

Post by gertlabs »

meetpateltech wrote: post #154

GPT-5.6 Sol sets a new SOTA on ARC-AGI-3: 7.8% Sol is the first verified frontier model to ever beat an ARC-AGI-3 game https://arcprize.org/results/openai-gpt-5-6

We have it slightly ahead of Fable in our multi-agent coding evaluations.

Fable's main advantage is that its average solution size is smaller. However, GPT 5.6 Sol is a substantial improvement from GPT 5.4/5.5 which would write verbose, defensive code. 31KB for GPT 5.4/5.5 down to 26KB for GPT 5.6 Sol, with better performance for Sol.

Fable scores slightly lower, but with an average solution size of 12.2 KB.

Data at https://gertlabs.com/rankings?mode=oneshot_coding

Re: GPT-5.6

#785

Post by try-working »

kylecordes wrote: post #619
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…

I wonder if it will do any better than past versions when one begs and pleads for it to get a job done using a concise, modest amount of code (as an expert human developer might), rather than responding to all prompts by shoveling in a large amount of code.

they said it will do worse on that

Re: GPT-5.6

#786

Post by mikeshi42 »

jrflo wrote: post #212
nilkn wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Agreed. GPT 5.5 will come up with more straightforward solutions with far fewer tokens than Claude. Also, the usage limits are much more generous for Codex than Claude Code for the same monthly plan.

I've been using both and as far as I can tell with ccusage, the $ equivalent budgets are about the same between them now. This may have been true before anthropic doubled their quotas and openai 2x promo expired last month.

Re: GPT-5.6

#787

Post by sneezychl »

nolok wrote: post #287
nilkn wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Anthropic's models are downright terrible at visual reasoning and design.

Gemini is fantastic, however.

Re: GPT-5.6

#788

Post by weird-eye-issue »

eig wrote: post #38

Funny to see that they did not include Fable 5 in their GeneBench and LifeSciBench comparisons because "it does not answer advanced biology questions and refuses the majority of questions in this eval". Winner by default!

Almost anything related to nutrition that goes beyond the very basic surface level questions is blocked

Re: GPT-5.6

#789

Post by jtrn »

energy123 wrote: post #677
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…

I use the strongest model (5.5 now 5.6 sol) on the highest reasoning effort with /fast for everything. With a $200 pro sub I can't even use my weekly limit. And it's faster than using a weaker model that makes more mistakes which I have to waste time fixing.

Same, I am actually able to reach my weekly limit, but when I start going below 30%, I switch to normal speed, and that usually gets me through the week.

I absolutely save money and time by constantly using everything at the highest reasoning. I guess my use case and needs are different from others, but I really don’t understand how it can be true when people say they don’t need the highest reasoning and best model. Every time I drop down, things are missed, code gets unnecessarily bloated, more mistakes, and more iterations to solve the same problem. I think it might be because I’m spending a lot of time in a legacy system that I’m trying to clean up, and given the messiness, one needs all the reasoning available to decode what the hell is going on in there.

Re: GPT-5.6

#790

Post by stpedgwdgfhgdd »

dbbk wrote: post #273
hk__2 wrote: 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.

Same for me, that is why I switched to Pi. I still use Sonnet or Opus, but mainly GPT due to cost.
Post reply on HN