7 ms·
Yeah I was using Claude pretty continuously for 3, 4 months and then decided to give Codex a whirl and it was impressive. I'd consider it to be a lot more cauti
by cmrdporcupine 1y ago
Yeah I was using Claude pretty continuously for 3, 4 months and then decided to give Codex a whirl and it was impressive. I'd consider it to be a lot more cautious and careful and less lazy?
It is however slow, and more expensive. You can either pay the $20 and get maybe 2 days of work out of it, or $200 for "Pro." But there's nothing inbetween like the $100 USD Claude Code tier.
- stavros 1y agoYeah, I'm really missing the $100 tier. The $20 gets me a day of coding a week with it, which is way too little, and $200/mo is too much for hobby projects.
- cmrdporcupine 1y agoI've personally been running the Claude Code tool but pointed at DeepSeek's API platform. Cheaper than both Anthropic and OpenAI, and about as good as Sonnet 4 was, I'm finding. Context window is too small though, and it sometimes has problems with compacting. But I was having that with Sonnet 4.5 as well.
- theshrike79 1y agoI kinda like what crush is doing: https://github.com/charmbracelet/crush https://github.com/charmbracelet/crush They're still lacking slash commands, sub agents etc (since they don't own their own model), but they do integrate language servers, which seems to be handy on larger codebases. Crush + GLM-4.6 is one of the three I use regularly along with Claude and Codex
- cmrdporcupine 1y agoOh this is pretty nice.. running it with deepseek now and so far pretty impressed.