logoalt Hacker News

firesteelraintoday at 1:12 AM5 repliesview on HN

How much better is it than Claude? I have both but Claude sucks up so many tokens.


Replies

bobbylarrybobbytoday at 1:24 AM

5.5 is absolutely comparable to opus 4.7 (both on highest effort), maybe even better. It generally seems less lazy, faster, and writes code closer to what I'd write. The only downside is that for very very long tasks, it can kind of lose track of the goal. For tasks under ten minutes I'll go with codex every time.

noisy_boytoday at 11:50 AM

Compaction is basically seamless which is a major weak point of Claude. At effort=low, Claude is better than codex but still slower. If you don't mind trading the upfront quality of work with additional micromanaging but at a faster speed, it is fine. I also think because of that very reason, you absorb more of the code.

stldevtoday at 2:52 AM

I switched some time after Anthropic bricked their models with adaptive thinking. It's a legit mystery to me how people are still using CC professionally.

Codex is far less frustrating and manages context better. It's also costing me about 1/3rd as much as Opus 4.7 on CC.

show 1 reply
riddlemethattoday at 4:04 AM

I stopped trying to use Claude to do anything with 4.7 because it sucks up so many tokens so quickly. I use the 4.6 model still and have switched to Codex for larger tasks. It also works better at more complex coding tasks than Claude for web apps that have python backends and typescript front ends.

yieldcrvtoday at 1:28 AM

Less gibliterrating and more doing

Very fast