Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it loser? He very well could be a sore winner here.
OpenAI is still the only AI company that has structured outputs. Anthropic now supports JSON schema but you can't specify array length.
GPT-5.3-Codex
251–260 of 634 posts
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#252I 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.
In my personal experience the GPT models have always been significantly better than the Claude models for agentic coding, I’m baffled why people think Claude has the edge on programming.
Opus is the first model I can trust to just do things, and do them right, at least small things. For larger/more complex things I have to keep either model on extremely short leashes. But the difference is enough that I canceled my GPT Pro sub so I could switch to Claude. Maybe 5.3 will change things, but I also cannot continue to ethically support Sam Altman's business.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#253I'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?
Not to be outdone, chatgpt 5.2 thinking high only needed about 8 iterations to get a mostly-working ffmpeg conversion script for bash. It took another 5 messages to translate it to run in windows, on powershell (models escaping newlines on windows properly will be pretty nuch AGI, as far as I’m concerned).
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#254I am on a max subscription for Claude, and hate the fact that OpenAI have not figured out that $20 => $200 is a big jump. Good luck to them. In terms of model, just last night, Codex 5.2 solved a problem for me which other models were going round and round. Almost same instructions. That said, I still plan to be on $100 Claude (overall value across many tasks, ability to create docs, co-work), and may bump up OpenAI…
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#255I know that's anecdotal, but it just seems Claude is often the default.
I'm sure there are key differences in how they handle coding tasks and maybe Claude is even a little better in some areas.
However, the note I see the most from Claude users is running out of usage.
Coding differences aside, this would be the biggest factor for me using one over the other. After several months on Codex's $20/mo. plan (and some pretty significant usage days), I have only come close to my usage limit once (never fully exceeded it).
That (at least to me) seems to be a much bigger deal than coding nuances.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you look at the ARC AGI 2? Codex might be overfit for terminal bench
ARC AGI 2 has a training set that model providers can choose to train on, so really wouldn't recommend using it as a general measure of coding ability.
As an analogy, Terence Tao may be one of the smartest people alive now, but IQ alone isn’t enough to do a job with no domain-specific training.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Why do you believe an LLM can't write these, just because they're 3D? If the assets are given (just as with a human game programmer, who has artists provide them the assets), then an LLM can write the code just the same.
Also try building any complex effects by prompting LLMs, you wont get any far, this is why all of the LLM coded websites look stupidly bland.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#258I'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?
Why even come to this site if you're so anti-innovation? Today with LLMs you can literally spend 5 minutes defining what you want to get, press send, go grab a coffee and come back to a working POC of something, in literally any programming language. This is literally stuff of wonders and magic that redefines how we interface with computers and code. And the only thing you can think of is to ask if it can do somethin…
I want AI that cures cancer and solves climate change. Instead we got AI that lets you plagiarize GPL code, does your homework for you, and roleplay your antisocial horny waifu fantasies.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#259May AI not write the code for me. May I at least understand what it has "written". AI help is good but don't replace real programmers completely. I'm enough copy pasting code i don't understand. What if one day AI will fall down and there will be no real programmers to write the software. AI for help is good but I don't want AI to write whole files into my project. Then something may broke and I won't know what's bro…
Sorry but companies will not hire you but instead a person who learned how to code with AI. Get with the times or lose.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#260I've always been fascinated to see significantly more people talking about using Claude than I see people talking about Codex. I know that's anecdotal, but it just seems Claude is often the default. I'm sure there are key differences in how they handle coding tasks and maybe Claude is even a little better in some areas. However, the note I see the most from Claude users is running out of usage. Coding differences asi…