4 ms·
Honestly we are all sleeping on GPT-5.4. Particularly with the influx of Claude users recently (and increasingly unstable platform) Codex has been added to my r
by whalesalad 7mo ago
Honestly we are all sleeping on GPT-5.4. Particularly with the influx of Claude users recently (and increasingly unstable platform) Codex has been added to my rotation and it's surprising me.
- rafaelmn 7mo agoGPT is shit at writing code. It's not dumb - extra high thinking is really good at catching stuff - but it's like letting a smart junior into your codebase - ignore all the conventions, surrounding context, just slop all over the place to get it working. Claude is just a level above in terms of editing code.
- whalesalad 7mo agoThis has been my experience. With very very rigid constraints it does ok, but without them it will optimize expediency and getting it done at the expense of integrating with the broader system.
- ctoth 7mo agoMy favorite example of this from last night: Me: Let's figure out how to clone our company Wordpress theme in Hugo. Here're some tools you can use, here's a way to compare screenshots, iterate until 0% difference. Codex: Okay Boss! I did the thing! I couldn't get the CSS to match so I just took PNGs of the original site and put them in place! Matches 100%!
- leobuskin 7mo agoAnd as a bonus: GPT is slow. I’m doing a lot of RE (IDA Pro + MCP), even when 5.4 gives a little bit better guesses (rarely, but happens) - it takes x2-x4 longer. So, it’s just easier to reiterate with Opus
- blazespin 7mo agoYeah, need some good RE benchmarks for the LLMs. :) RE is very interesting problem. A lot more that SWE can be RE'd. I've found the LLMs are reluctant to assist, though you can workaround.
- 19h 7mo agoMind sharing the use cases you're using IDA via MCP for?
- aizk 7mo agoI've been messing with using Claude, Codex, and Kimi even for reverse engineering at https://decomp.dev/ https://decomp.dev/ it's a ton of fun. Great because matching bytes is a scoring function that's easy for the models to understand and make progress on.
- adamgoodapp 7mo agoI want to get into RE with AI. Which model you liking the most?
- rustystump 7mo agoThis. People drastically underestimate how much more useful a lightning fast slightly dumb model is compared to a super smart but mega slow model is. Sure, u may need to bust out the beef now and then. However, the overwhelming majority of work the fast stupid model is a better fit.
- Jcampuzano2 7mo agoNot my experience. GPT 5.4 walks all over Claude from what I've worked with and its Claude that is the one willing to just go do unnecessary stuff that was never asked for or implement the more hacky solutions to things without a care for maintainability/readability. But I do not use extra high thinking unless its for code review. I sit at GPT 5.4 high 95% of the time.
- zarzavat 7mo agoYes, it's becoming clear that OpenAI kinda sucks at alignment. GPT-5 can pass all the benchmarks but it just doesn't "feel good" like Claude or Gemini.
- lilytweed 7mo agoWhenever I come back to ChatGPT after using Claude or Gemini for an extended period, I’m really struck by the “AI-ness.” All the verbal tics and, truly, sloppishness, have been trained away by the other, more human-feeling models at this point.
- kranke155 7mo agoGPT was clearly changed after its sycophantic models lead to the lawsuits.
- josephg 7mo agoIt still has a very ... plastic feeling. The way it writes feels cheap somehow. I don't know why, but Claude seems much more natural to me. I enjoy reading its writing a lot more. That said, I'll often throw a prompt into both claude and chatgpt and read both answers. GPT is frequently smarter.
- kranke155 7mo agoGPT is more accurate. But Claude has this way of association between things that seems smarter and more human to me.
- chaos_emergent 7mo agoAn alternative but similar formulation of that statement is that Anthropic has spent more training effort in getting the model to “feel good” rather than being correct on verifiable tasks. Which more or less tracks with my experience of using the model.
- 7mo ago
- sho_hn 7mo agoVery different experience for me. Codex 5.3+ on xhigh are the only models I've tried so far that write reasonably decent C++ (domains: desktop GUI, robotics, game engine dev, embedded stuff, general systems engineering-type codebases), and idiomatic code in languages not well-represented in training data, e.g. QML. One thing I like is explicitly that it knows better when to stop, instead of brute-forcing a solution by spamming bespoke helpers everywhere no rational dev would write that way. Not always, no, and it takes investment in good prompting/guardrails/plans/explicit test recipes for sure. I'm still on average better at programming in context than Codex 5.4, even if slower. But in terms of "task complexity I can entrust to a model and not be completely disappointed and annoyed", it scores the best so far. Saves a lot on review/iteration overhead. It's annoying, too, because I don't much like OpenAI as a company. (Background: 25 years of C++ etc.)
- boring-human 7mo agoSame background as you, and same exact experience as you. Opus and Gemini have not come close to Codex for C++ work. I also run exclusively on xhigh. Its handling of complexity is unmatched. At least until next week when Mythos and GPT 6 throw it all up in the air again.
- camdenreslink 7mo agoChatGPT 5.4 with extra high reasoning has worked really well for me, and I don't notice a huge difference with Opus 4.6 with high reasoning (those are the 2 models/thinking modes I've used the most in the last month or so).
- babelfish 7mo agoTotally. Best-in-class for SWE work (until Mythos gets released, if ever, but I suspect the rumored "Spud" will be out by then too)
- girvo 7mo agoIt really isn’t. I wish it was, because work complains about overuse of Opus.
- jeswin 7mo agoIt really is, for complex tasks. Claude excels at low-mid complexity (CRUD apps, most business apps). For anything somewhat out of the distribution, codex at the moment has no peer.
- ttul 7mo agoI find that more experienced devs are more likely to prefer Codex… anecdotal but… it’s a thing.
- xvector 7mo agoThis is because no one bothers to set thinking to high, as it now defaults to medium in CC. Once you set thinking to high it works just as well as 5.4 even for pretty complex tasks
- jeswin 7mo agoI have always used Claude at max thinking levels since it launched. It has never been up to the task. For clarity, the task being this: https://github.com/tsoniclang/tsonic https://github.com/tsoniclang/tsonic Meanwhile, there are half a dozen other projects (business apps, web apps etc) where it works well.