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

GPT-5.3-Codex

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 634 posts

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#211

Post by Rperry2174 »

utilize1808 wrote: post #202
Rperry2174 wrote: post #188

Whats interesting to me is that these gpt-5.3 and opus-4.6 are diverging philosophically and really in the same way that actual engineers and orgs have diverged philosophically With Codex (5.3), the framing is an interactive collaborator: you steer it mid-execution, stay in the loop, course-correct as it works. With Opus 4.6, the emphasis is the opposite: a more autonomous, agentic, thoughtful system that plans deepl…

I think it's the opposite. Especially considering Codex started out as a web app that offers very little interactivity: you are supposed to drop a request and let it run automatously in a containerized environment; you can then follow up on it via chat --- no interactive code editing.

Fair I agree that was true of early codex and my perception too.. but today there are two announcements that came out and thats what im referring to.

specifically, the GPT-5.3 post explicitly leans into "interactive collaborator" langauge and steering mid execution

OpenAI post: "Much like a colleague, you can steer and interact with GPT-5.3-Codex while it’s working, without losing context."

OpenAI post: "Instead of waiting for a final output, you can interact in real time—ask questions, discuss approaches, and steer toward the solution"

Claude post: "Claude Opus 4.6 is designed for longer-running, agentic work — planning complex tasks more carefully and executing them with less back-and-forth from the user."

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#212

Post by nickstinemates »

nurettin wrote: post #51
granzymes wrote: post #3

I think Anthropic rushed out the release before 10am this morning to avoid having to put in comparisons to GPT-5.3-codex! The new Opus 4.6 scores 65.4 on Terminal-Bench 2.0, up from 64.7 from GPT-5.2-codex. GPT-5.3-codex scores 77.3.

Opus was quite useless today. Created lots of globals, statics, forward declarations, hidden implementations in cpp files with no testable interface, erasing types, casting void pointers, I had to fix quite a lot and decouple the entangled mess. Hopefully performance will pick up after the rollout.

Did you give it any architecture guidance? An architecture skill that it can load to make sure it lays out things according to your taste?

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#213

Post by morleytj »

meisel wrote: post #121
morleytj wrote: post #69

The behind the scenes on deciding when to release these models has got to be pretty insanely stressful if they're coming out within 30 minutes-ish of each other.

I wonder if their "5.3" was continuously being updated, with regenerated benchmarks with each improvement, and they just stayed ready to release it when claude released

This seems plausible. It would be shocking if these companies didn't have an automated testing suite which is recomputing these benchmarks on a regular basis, and uploading to a dashboard for supervision.

Given that they already pre-approved various language and marketing materials beforehand there's no real reason they couldn't just leave it lined up with a function call to go live once the key players make the call.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#215

Post by raffkede »

__mharrison__ wrote: post #94

I never really used Codex (found it to slow) just 5.2, which I going to be an excellent model for my work. This looks like another step up. This week, I'm all local though, playing with opencode and running qwen3 coder next on my little spark machine. With the way these local models are progressing, I might move all my llm work locally.

I think the slow feeling is a UI thing in codex

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#216

Post by smith7018 »

bgirard wrote: post #185
smith7018 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just asked Opus 4.6 to debug a bug in my current changes and it went for 20 minutes before I interrupted it. Take that as you will.

Doesn't feel like a useful data point without more context. For some hard bugs I'd be thrilled to wait 30 minutes for a fix, for a trivial CSS fix not so much. I've spent weeks+ of my career fix single bugs. Context is everything.

Sure, but I've never experienced a 20 minute wait with CC before. It was an architectural question but it would have taken a couple minutes with a definitive answer on 4.5.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#217

Post by falloutx »

beernet wrote: post #181
nananana9 wrote: post #173

I've been listening to the insane 100x productivity gains you all are getting with AI and "this new crazy model is a real game changer" for a few years now, I think it's about time I asked: Can you guys point me ton a single useful, majority LLM-written, preferably reliable, program that solves a non-trivial problem that hasn't been solved before a bunch of times in publicly available code?

Can you point me to a human written program an LLM cannot write? And no, just answering with a massively large codebase does not count because this issue is temporary. Some people just hate progress.

Even a normal website like landonorris.com. Try copying all those effects with AI.

Another example: Red Dead Redemption 2

Another one: Roller coaster tycoon

Another one: ShaderToy

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#218

Post by CuriouslyC »

Davidzheng wrote: post #86
lossolo wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's funny is that most of this "progress" is new datasets + post-training shaping the model's behavior (instruction + preference tuning). There is no moat besides that.

"post-training shaping the models behavior" it seems from your wording that you find it not that dramatic. I rather find the fact that RL on novel environments providing steady improvements after base-model an incredibly bullish signal on future AI improvements. I also believe that the capability increase are transferring to other domains (or at least covers enough domains) that it represents a real rise in intellige…

What evidence do you base your opinions on capability transfer on?

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#219

Post by mcintyre1994 »

Rperry2174 wrote: post #188

Whats interesting to me is that these gpt-5.3 and opus-4.6 are diverging philosophically and really in the same way that actual engineers and orgs have diverged philosophically With Codex (5.3), the framing is an interactive collaborator: you steer it mid-execution, stay in the loop, course-correct as it works. With Opus 4.6, the emphasis is the opposite: a more autonomous, agentic, thoughtful system that plans deepl…

This kind of sounds like both of them stepping into the other’s turf, to simplify a bit.

I haven’t used Codex but use Claude Code, and the way people (before today) described Codex to me was like how you’re describing Opus 4.6

So it sounds like they’re converging toward “both these approaches are useful at different times” potentially? And neither want people who prefer one way of working to be locked to the other’s model.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#220

Post by cchance »

Rperry2174 wrote: post #188

Whats interesting to me is that these gpt-5.3 and opus-4.6 are diverging philosophically and really in the same way that actual engineers and orgs have diverged philosophically With Codex (5.3), the framing is an interactive collaborator: you steer it mid-execution, stay in the loop, course-correct as it works. With Opus 4.6, the emphasis is the opposite: a more autonomous, agentic, thoughtful system that plans deepl…

Just because you can inject steering doesn't mean they stered away from long running...

Theres hundreds of people who upload Codex 5.2 running for hours unattended and coming back with full commits

Post reply on HN