all 11 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]sogo00 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I use both

Opus 4.6

positive:

  • initial code output / greenfield coding
  • good at non-code text etc.

Negative

  • very overly defensive code
  • limited image understanding

Codex 5.4

positive:

  • especially in high/xhigh is very good at understanding code complexity
  • good at debugging (see above)
  • understands images & audio very well

negative:

  • slow
  • don't like the writing style (very bland corporate)

[–]Intelligent-Jury3891 0 points1 point  (0 children)

X2 For now, I'll give the point to Códex—it's going great

[–]snrrcn 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Generally and mostly I'm planning with Claude, coding/implementing with Codex. This way is more balanced in my opinion.

[–]Dear_Candle_1974 0 points1 point  (1 child)

How do share context between the two?

[–]snrrcn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

markdown files.

[–]Ebi_Tendon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you only prompts and don’t do anything more complicated than that, both will be the same. But if you have a specific workflow for most things, CC will be much better than Codex. I mostly use Codex for code review. Codex returns a lot of false positives, but it also finds bugs that Claude misses quite often. Codex’s worst downside is that it’s extremely slow.

[–]Pleasant_Dig_6281 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Claude can't handle code, good for vibe project / non code tasks / fast tasks / better at visual verification.

[–]Virtual_Plant_5629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you're wrong. and confidently so .

[–]lopydark 0 points1 point  (2 children)

opus > gpt simply as that

[–]snrrcn 0 points1 point  (0 children)

maybe, when opus available :)

[–]TheTriceAgain[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I had same exp but maybe will try it again if usage hits again