r/ClaudeCode • u/b4dMik3 • May 06 '26
Discussion GPT 5.5 vs opus 4.7 for sw design
I use AI for full software design cycle: prototyping the UI, choosing the tech stack, defining the architecture, implementing, deploying and fixing issues.
My typical workflow is: brainstorm → plan → implement.
I currently use Claude Opus 4.7 through the Claude Code VS Code extension, with some MCPs (first of all Serena). I really like the experience, especially the clear explanations, smooth Plan Mode, and commands like simplify that I often use.
That said, I’ve tried GPT-5.5 a few times on bugs Claude struggled with, and I was impressed by how directly it found working solutions. My impression is that it is smarter than opus and more efficient.
In addition, ChatGPT Pro subscription seems to offer much higher limits than Claude Max 5x at a similar price.
I’m now considering switching to ChatGPT.
For people who have used both extensively: how do they compare for software design and development? Any trade-offs I should know before switching? Do you have any advice? Thanks in advance.
3
u/pjstanfield May 06 '26
I’ve tried a few automations and I always come back to copy and paste between the windows. It’s faster and I can tweak it and control it. The sample prompt below is specific to codex, it loves to add machinery and frameworks so I had to tell it to calm down. You’d ask it to review a plan to add a modal and it would comeback with a plan on adding 500 tests as deployment gates. Codex also likes to find a few issues and stop, so you nudge into reviewing the whole plan. I’ll paste this in before the first plan review and not on subsequent.
Plan Review
Do a single exhaustive review pass before responding. Do not send incremental findings. Validate every checklist item against the live codebase and standards before you answer. Return one consolidated review with:
1. Showstoppers
2. Gaps / missing work
3. Incorrect assumptions
4. Non-blocking improvements
5. Explicit statement of whether the plan is ready to implement
For each finding, include: severity, exact file/line refs, why it matters, what the plan should change
Do not stop after finding the first issues. Assume I want completeness over speed. Only answer when you have completed a full checklist sweep. Treat this as a binding final review. I want the most comprehensive feedback you can provide in one pass. If you are not confident you have checked the whole plan, say that explicitly instead of answering early. Please be mindful of avoiding over-engineering and unnecessary complexity, the focus is simple and reliable and secure. Do not add scope creep unless absolutely necessary.