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

321–330 of 634 posts

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#321

Post by cootsnuck »

codethief wrote: post #279
itay-maman wrote: post #102

Something that caught my eye from the announcement: > GPT‑5.3‑Codex is our first model that was instrumental in creating itself. The Codex team used early versions to debug its own training I'm happy to see the Codex team moving to this kind of dogfooding. I think this was critical for Claude Code to achieve its momentum.

Sounds like the researchers behind https://ai-2027.com/ haven't been too far off so far.

We'll see. The first two things that they said would move from "emerging tech" to "currently exists" by April 2026 are:

- "Someone you know has an AI boyfriend"

- "Generalist agent AIs that can function as a personal secretary"

I'd be curious how many people know someone that is sincerely in a relationship with an AI.

And also I'd love to know anyone that has honestly replaced their human assistant / secretary with an AI agent. I have an assistant, they're much more valuable beyond rote input-output tasks... Also I encourage my assistant to use LLMs when they can be useful like for supplementing research tasks.

Fundamentally though, I just don't think any AI agents I've seen can legitimately function as a personal secretary.

Also they said by April 2026:

> 22,000 Reliable Agent copies thinking at 13x human speed

And when moving from "Dec 2025" to "Apr 2026" they switch "Unreliable Agent" to "Reliable Agent". So again, we'll see. I'm very doubtful given the whole OpenClaw mess. Nothing about that says "two months away from reliable".

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#322

Post by bt1a »

karmasimida wrote: post #198
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…

> 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 deeply, runs longer, and asks less of the human. Ain't the UX is the exact opposite? Codex thinks much longer before gives you back the answer.

This is most likely an inference serving problem in terms of capacity and latency given that Opus X and the latest GPT models available in the API have always responded quickly and slowly, respectively

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#323

Post by Rudybega »

StephenHerlihyy wrote: post #172
jahsome wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another day, another hn thread of "this model changes everything" followed immediately by a reply stating "actually I have the literal opposite experience and find competitor's model is the best" repeated until it's time to start the next day's thread.

What amazes me the most is the speed at which things are advancing. Go back a year or even a year before that and all these incremental improvements have compounded. Things that used to require real effort to consistently solve, either with RAGs, context/prompt engineering, have become… trivial. I totally agree with your point that each step along the way doesn’t necessarily change that much. But in the aggregate it’…

The denial of this overall trend on here and in other internet spaces is starting to really bother me. People need to have sober conversations about the speed of this increase and what kind of effects it's going to have on the world.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#324

Post by fragmede »

wilg wrote: post #144
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.

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.

How many people are building the same thing multiple times to compare model performance? I'm much more interested in getting the thing I'm building getting built, than than comparing AIs to each other.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#325

Post by wiz21c »

manquer wrote: post #91
observationist wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The labs have fully embraced the cutthroat competition, the arms race has fully shed the civilized facade of beneficient mutual cooperation. Dirty tricks and underhanded tactics will happen - I think Demis isn't savvy in this domain, but might end up stomping out the competition on pure performance. Elon, Sam, and Dario know how to fight ugly and do the nasty political boardroom crap. 26 is gonna be a very dramatic y…

>civilized facade of mutual cooperation >Dirty tricks and underhanded tactics As long the tactics are legal ( i.e. not corporate espionage, bribes etc), the no holds barred full free market competition is the best thing for the market and the consumers.

in the short term maybe, in the long term it depends how many winners you have. If only two, the market will be a duopoly. Customers will get better AI but will have zero power over the way the AI is produced or consumed (i.e. cO2 emission, ethics, etc will be burnt)

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#326

Post by Yiin »

falloutx wrote: post #262
dudeinhawaii wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think for many/most programmers = 'speed + output' and webdev == "great coding". Not throwing shade anyone's way. I actually do prefer Claude for webdev (even if it does cringe things like generate custom CSS on every page) -- because I hate webdev and Claude designs are always better looking. But the meat of my code is backend and "hard" and for that Codex is always better, not even a competition. In that domain,…

> I actually do prefer Claude for webdev Ah and let me guess all your frontends look like cookie cutter versions of this: https://openclaw.dog/

Yes and I love it.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#327

Post by Rudybega »

cootsnuck wrote: post #321
codethief wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the researchers behind https://ai-2027.com/ haven't been too far off so far.

We'll see. The first two things that they said would move from "emerging tech" to "currently exists" by April 2026 are: - "Someone you know has an AI boyfriend" - "Generalist agent AIs that can function as a personal secretary" I'd be curious how many people know someone that is sincerely in a relationship with an AI. And also I'd love to know anyone that has honestly replaced their human assistant / secretary with a…

I think they immediately corrected their median timelines for takeoff to 2028 upon releasing the article (I believe there was a math mistake or something initially), so all those dates can probably be bumped back a few months. Regardless, the trend seems fairly on track.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#328

Post by satvikpendem »

falloutx wrote: post #316
satvikpendem wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you're confused about, I never said assets were hard to get, I just said that the LLM needs to be provided a folder of the assets for it to make use of them, it's not going to create them from scratch (at least not without great difficulty, because LLMs are capable of using and coding Three.js for example). I don't know the answer to your first question because I don't hang around in the 3D or game dev…

you have shown me 0 examples, I showed actual examples to the given question. Your answers have just been "AI can also do this" but gave no actual proof.

The examples are in the video I linked, as I said, if you don't bother to watch it then I'm not sure what to tell you. As I said for games I don't know and won't presume to search up some random vibe coded game if I don't have personal experience with how LLMs handle games, but for web development, the sites I've made and seen made look pretty good.

Edit: I found examples [0] of games too with generated assets as well. These are all one shot so I imagine with more prompting you can get a decent game all without coding anything yourself.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8brENzmq1pE

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#330

Post by __mharrison__ »

raffkede wrote: post #215
__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

I realize my comment was unclear. I use codex the CLI all the time, but generally with this invocation: `codex --full-auto -m gpt-5.2`

However, when I use the 5.2codex model, I've found it to be very slow and worse (hard to quantify, but I preferred straight-up 5.2 output).

Post reply on HN