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

341–350 of 634 posts

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#341

Post by wilg »

soulofmischief wrote: post #252
wilg wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

GPT 5.2 codex plans well but fucks off a lot, goes in circles (more than opus 4.5) and really just lacks the breadth of integrated knowledge that makes opus feel so powerful. 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 s…

I always use 5.2-Codex-High or 5.2-Codex-Extra High (in Cursor). The regular version is probably too dumb.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#342

Post by ifwinterco »

legulere wrote: post #273
xandrius wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 don't think that the user you are responding to is anti-innovation, but rather points out that the usefulness of AI is oversold. I'm using Copilot for Visual Studio at work. It is useful for me to speed some typing up using the auto-complete. On the other hand in agentic mode it fails to follow simple basic orders, and needs hand-holding to run. This might not be the most bleeding-edge setup, but the discrepancy be…

I think copilot is widely considered to be fairly rubbish, your description of agentic coding was also my experience prior to ~Q3 2025, but things have shifted meaningfully since then

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#343

Post by iranintoavan »

hbarka wrote: post #337
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…

How can they be diverging, LLMs are built on similar foundations aka the Transformer architecture. Do you mean the training method (RLHF) is diverging?

I'm not OP but I suspect they are meaning the products / tooling / company direction, not necessarily the underlying LLM architecture.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#344

Post by derac »

ponyous wrote: post #105

I think models are smart enough for most of the stuff, these little incremental changes barely matter now. What I want is the model that is fast .

This is faster if their marketing is right, it uses significantly less tokens. Gemini 3 flash is very good as well.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#345

Post by adarsh2321 »

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…

[dead]

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#346

Post by sidgarimella »

Many are saying codex is more interactive but ironically I think that very interactivity/determinism works best when using codex remotely as a cloud agent and in highly async cases. Conversely I find opus great locally, where I can ram messages into it to try to lever its autonomy best (and interrupt/clean up)

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#347

Post by cwyers »

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.

Codex now lets you tell the LLM tgings in the middle of its thinking without interrupting it, so you can read the thinking traces and tell it to change course if it's going off track.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#348

Post by nurettin »

nickstinemates wrote: post #212
nurettin wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Yes, it has a very tight CLAUDE.md which it used to follow. Feels like this happens a couple of times a month.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#349

Post by jhancock »

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…

Good breakdown.

I usually want the codex approach for code/product "shaping" iteratively with the ai.

Once things are shaped and common "scaling patterns" are well established, then for things like adding a front end (which is constantly changing, more views) then letting the autonomous approach run wild can *sometimes* be useful.

I have found that codex is better at remembering when I ask to not get carried away...whereas claude requires constant reminders.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#350

Post by zozbot234 »

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…

> Someone you know has an AI boyfriend

MyBoyfriendIsAI is a thing

> Generalist agent AIs that can function as a personal secretary

Isn't that what MoltBot/OpenClaw is all about?

So far these look like successful predictions.

Post reply on HN