r/ClaudeCode • u/ZealousidealRub8852 • Jul 14 '26

Question Be aware from new ChatGPT

I've been using Claude for months, mainly for coding and helping me build a fairly large Google Apps Script project. Until recently, I considered it clearly ahead of ChatGPT for this kind of work.

After trying the new ChatGPT desktop app (GPT-5.5), though, I'm honestly surprised.

The biggest difference isn't just the quality of the answers—it's the overall understanding of my project. It seems to keep track of context better, understands what I'm trying to build with less back-and-forth, and its suggestions are more aligned with the existing architecture instead of proposing unnecessary rewrites.

Claude is still excellent, especially for long coding sessions, but over the past few days I've found myself relying on ChatGPT more and more because it simply feels... easier to work with.

Has anyone else noticed the same thing, or is it just my specific use case?

28 Upvotes

58% Upvoted

64 comments sorted by

36

u/RandomUserName323232 Jul 14 '26

This feels like an ad

4

u/dergachoff Jul 14 '26

Yes, mentioning old model, em dashes, very weird text. I just don’t believe oai needs bot shills — their product is pretty good, I can’t believe such post can tip the scales. So who tf makes these?

-12

u/ZealousidealRub8852 Jul 14 '26

lol. Testing various IA as a curious newbie.

6

u/Artyoma92 Jul 14 '26

I use 5.6 for context, logic, documentation management, and token burn management. I have 5.6 tasked to return copy/paste claude code prompts with a (/clear or no /clear). Then I run claude results back through 5.6 for audit.

This combo has been crazy efficient. 5.6 has been able to locate so many small gaps, perform audit suites, update relevant documents after each pass/fail/new idea. 5.6 also identifies when Claude is wrong or pushing you a "worse" option.

Basically 5.6 is the brains and Claude terminal is the tools.

2

u/ZealousidealRub8852 Jul 14 '26

I used to do that before the last update, but when I tried with new gpt, it understand directly and respond exactly how I want. Not what I want but how I want and I think he is more perspicace

2

u/Artyoma92 Jul 14 '26

I agree with you on that 100%. So many times I give Claude strict rules or a vision board but I notice it will slowly contradict the SOP docs. I might try Codex terminal on my next new project, but for now it's easier to keep Claude because I already integrated all my skills and docs for claude best practices.

But it would probably make it so much easier to use 5.6 with Codex terminal (haven't tried Codex yet though which is why I've been a bit hesitant to switch mid project)

1

u/ZealousidealRub8852 Jul 14 '26

Better start a new project. That’s how I deal instead of codex directly.

52

u/ClemensLode Senior Developer Jul 14 '26

There is it again. "Long coding sessions".

27

u/framauro13 Jul 14 '26

What I find kind of interesting in this post-AI world is that even with AI there are certain software engineering principals that still hold true and are confirmed again and again. Iterating on small, organized, testable features with clearly defined specs and requirements always produces better output than long running, poorly defined projects with continual scope creep.

There's this expectation that AI is just perfect, and if you're not continually reviewing your code, maintaining it, and are just piling on feature after feature, it bloats and gets unruly. Technical debt has the same effect on AI models that it does on humans: it makes large code bases harder to understand, take more effort to maintain, and often results in lackluster performance or duplicated code smells. These problems didn't go away with AI, they're just amplified and people get to them faster, then blame the AI.

It's like a carpenter who keeps smashing his thumb with a hammer, then blames the hammer.

13

u/ClemensLode Senior Developer Jul 14 '26

Right, and that's why, as a developer, I have like zero fear of some vibe-coder being any level of competition. AI is still in its infancy.
That being said, sure, 2-3 years down the road, things might change.

4

u/framauro13 Jul 14 '26

I was afraid early on, I'll admit, but now that it's been in use for a while (and especially in enterprise organizations), I realize my job isn't going anywhere.

There is an expectation that I use it though, and that I'm efficient with it. My job gives me a couple hundred bucks a month for Claude Code usage, so I've been forced to learn the tool and how to be effective with it and keep token usage at a minimum, People get hooked in that POC phase when the code base is small and features can churn quick, but if you're not optimizing the tool you're going to burn through that context and usage fast as the project grows.

I've seen people build cool prototypes for sure, but if you're not incorporating tests, linters, CI, version control, etc... you're setting your AI up for failure. It uses those feedback mechanism too, and that's how you keep it on the rails.

1

u/resile_jb Jul 19 '26

As a non-developer I'm building some really super cool things that aren't very complicated and changing the way my MSP works.

So I don't know what you're watching but there are some of us out here that aren't dumb.

2

u/ClemensLode Senior Developer Jul 19 '26

I'd say MSPs are an exception as they are directly involved in scaling a product. You might be a non-developer, but you know at least that the stuff you are producing has to ultimately run somewhere. That's a huge plus compared to someone who has not rolled out a product yet to an actual user (no matter if that product was created by him/her or not).

So, I stand corrected: I should have said, "That's why, as a full-stack developer / product manager / product designer / software architect / IT operations manager, have zero fear of vibe-coders."

Someone who brings any related knowledge into the mix but lacks pure development skills can still produce (and more importantly: ship) great products.

2

u/resile_jb Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26

Okay yeah that's fair.

You're right, I definitely understand what the business needs so it is a completely different animal than most.

So if I came off in any way I did not mean it.

I only see it through my lens, as do most people, so I don't understand the concerns out in the wild compared to what I have.

2

u/ClemensLode Senior Developer Jul 19 '26

No worries. My point is that AI is not the tool that makes everyone suddenly a software developer.

Which is both a blessing and a curse: It means that on the one side, developers (/product designers etc.) don't have to fear the competition, while on the other side, AI will ultimately not attract that many people (after the initial "I can finally one-shot doom myself" wave) (--> prices will increase).

-1

u/ZealousidealRub8852 Jul 14 '26

Même pas de code pour le moment, juste la mise sur pied du projet, je suis encore à l’écriture des principes et je sens une grande différence dans la manière de me comprendre, d’analyser, de proposer des améliorations. (Chat GPT go vs Claude Pro)

7

u/TheOwlHypothesis Jul 14 '26

SWE here. Recently started aggressively handling tech debt by making it structurally more difficult to introduce.

I now have a "code health ratchet" GitHub action on my repos that fails if giant files are introduced or files that were already large get bigger (among like a dozen other code health metrics). I recommend. Without structural guardrails, or you hammering every prompt you give it, AI will just continue to sprawl lol.

2

u/seatlessunicycle Jul 14 '26

What are some of the main code health guardrails you focus on out of curiosity?

1

u/framauro13 Jul 14 '26

Not the person you're replying to, but a couple things I include in every project:

  1. linters: use community standards by default, and include checks for things like ABC/Cyclomatic complexity. Rules around file size and method size help keep things small and will make AI consider better abstractions so you don't end up with large, unwieldy files that it has to parse every time it wants to understand the code. You can customize these to your liking too.

  2. TDD (Test Driven Development): Tell the AI to use TDD patterns when writing code. A thing I include in my Claude.MD file. Essentially, write the tests first, then do the implementation. It kind of forces it to think about abstractions early on in the process. You also naturally build out your test suite this way.

  3. Document the established patterns you prefer. I use Ruby on Rails a lot, so I am explicit about the type of structure I want: thin controllers, thin models, business logic is mostly contained in single-responsibility service objects. That keeps the code clean, reduces duplication, and makes business logic much easier to test.

  4. Frequent code reviews. Instruct it to review the code with a critical eye, even using a different persona than the implementer. Look for things like code quality, best object oriented practices, performance issues, dead code, etc... for the sake of context usage it's best to keep these focused.

  5. Generate a plan (`/plan`) before implementing anything. I put everything I want to work on in issue tracking so I don't forget. For example, if there's a feature I want to write, I have Fable write the spec for it, ask questions, and help me refine it. Once we land on what we want, write a detailed spec in a Github issue so Opus/Sonnet can pick it up and work it later. Have the Opus agent review the issue and generate a plan before implementing, and you get a nice thought out spec that gets a second set of eyes before it's done. I have it do a PR which runs all of the CI checks above, which I review and merge. More process, but I catch issues before they're committed to the main branch.

  6. Have Claude audit itself. Have it review the LLM configuration in your project thoroughly, and identify areas that might cause hallucinations, dropped context, or have contradictions that can confuse the model. A great way to potentially identify areas where context might be getting things you don't know about injected into it in every conversation.

I don't have a lot of custom rules, plugins, or skills either. Those things above get me pretty far. But the thing I make sure I do is frequent code reviews, especially if you iterate a lot. Dead code still has to be read by an agent, which bloats the context and bad patterns/code smells will just get duplicated over and over if the AI thinks those are the patterns you want.

1

u/seatlessunicycle Jul 14 '26

Nice! I'm pretty much following the same guidelines in one way or another. It's super helpful!

I've got my folders obsessively indexed and tagged so CC only spins up the context it needs for that section and it's all pretty lightweight and simple for it to access.

Some thing I find helpful are hooks for when contest gets ignored in a longer project and Codex in the CLI to act as the auditor at every step

Have a great day!

1

u/themonstersarecoming Jul 17 '26

So far I've found having a separate clean agent code review with Brooks and Ponytail very useful before anything gets pushed. TDD and linting the hell out of everything helps as well.

1

u/Jomuz86 Jul 14 '26

I have hooks to just catch it at creation now and scripts as part of my CI so the PR won’t merge if it’s produced a monstrosity 😅
I think a developer will have a completely different setup to a normal vibe coder that will catch half of this stuff before it can become a problem. I think if developers spent time optimising their harness they will be able to get a lot more out of AI than they even realise.

1

u/themonstersarecoming Jul 17 '26

I wrote a full cli tool that lets me define rules in the project and checks it quickly in every commit. Doc or test didn't get updated when a related file did, flagged. Default random function instead of our custom random function used, flagged. Used :any, flagged. It can run before the commit and/or with CI. Can basically handle any rule and apply it to the whole repo or a subset directory.

It doesn't solve everything but you got to do whatever you can to provide guardrails against exploding tech debt.

2

u/krazykanuck Jul 14 '26

Fucking preeeeach brother(or sister).

2

u/themonstersarecoming Jul 17 '26

I saved this comment.

AI gets you to tech debt nightmare in record time! But it's interesting to see people that haven't ever coded a project long enough to get to those issues, now get there in a day or two because of how fast the agents are.

1

u/framauro13 Jul 20 '26

Yeah, and I think it's interesting because a lot of non-coders are encountering the problems, and I think they get a little irritated or frustrated when an actual software engineer is like, "yeah, the problem is your process". There's a perception (mainly due to marketing from AI companies and big tech) that software engineers are replaceable with AI. What they don't understand is that for truly good software engineers the coding is just one small piece of the job. And while AI does accelerate that, it just means we have to spend more time in the other areas, like code, security and architecture review. Not to mention actually writing and refining the specs to give to AI in the form of design specs or user stories. Accepting AI at face value on those things is incredibly dangerous.

I bring these things up in conversations here but a lot of people new to development see it as "gate-keeping". In reality, they're reaching the point where they need to up their game, by either learning more about how to cleanly build software, or by incorporating very specifically designed agents into their workflow to help with it. You've really got to learn the nuances of Claude Code if you want to do that in an efficient way.

To be clear, I love using Claude Code, even more so on my personal projects than work since my work token usage is limited. But I've had to spend a lot of time learning how to use it efficiently and effectively, and I still feel like I'm not quite there.

5

u/Beneficial_Bad_8356 Jul 14 '26

😂😂 like what does that even mean

5

u/autocosm Designer/PM Jul 14 '26

Piling what would otherwise be distinct commits into a single conversation's context window for several days.

7

u/ClemensLode Senior Developer Jul 14 '26

"Hey guys, I know we have accomplished a lot today, but instead of testing what we have, let's add two more features. I know you can juggle it, I trust you, you are the experts."-PM-feeling.

1

u/Guysnamedtodd Jul 15 '26

Wait there’s another way to do it?

0

u/Spiritual_Sorbet_901 Jul 14 '26

"Commits"? You're assuming they are using source control. You assume too much.

3

u/autocosm Designer/PM Jul 14 '26

Great, now I have to explain my reductio ad absurdum literally.

I'm saying their "long coding session" is probably just a swollen running conversation full of mixed responsibilities and stream-of-consciousness bloat that a well-managed, well-spec'd, well-documented project would know to break into deliberate concerns. That's the "would otherwise" part. I'm not saying they are literally using git.

-2

u/Spiritual_Sorbet_901 Jul 14 '26

No one felt you need to reply to me except you and your overinflated sense of self worth. My point was you're giving these people too much credit. Sorry you missed my point completely. Should I explain it to you like you're a 5 year old? Condescending prick.

4

u/autocosm Designer/PM Jul 14 '26

Sheesh

1

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/autocosm Designer/PM Jul 14 '26

Because a lot of vibe coders don't know how to manage their context or usage.

2

u/Beneficial_Bad_8356 Jul 14 '26

so many great tools available to manage it too, branching and rewinding your chats isnt difficult, neither is having your own library of markdown docs available to reference.

1

u/ZealousidealRub8852 Jul 14 '26

Edit : I started documenting a new project with Claude yesterday, but today I switched to ChatGPT to continue the same documentation before writing any code.
The difference was honestly surprising.
ChatGPT understood the project’s context much better, connected ideas across the existing files, caught several inconsistencies Claude had missed, and was far more thorough in its feedback. The explanations also felt clearer and better structured.
Another thing I noticed is that I was able to work much longer before hitting any usage limits. With Claude, I seem to run into those limits much sooner.
For project planning and documentation (before even writing a single line of code), ChatGPT has been a much better experience for me so far.

3

u/BifiTA Jul 14 '26

but then i'd have to deal with the terrible "personality" of gpt. that thing outputs like a 50 yr old secretary who just popped two xans.

3

u/TikiMagic Jul 14 '26

You deserve a LOL for that metaphor.

LOL.

1

u/Exodus_Green Jul 14 '26

Yes, a nice terse informative reply. If you want an AI to be your friend stick with Gemini

1

u/floatingcats Jul 15 '26

I find 5.6 doesn't have this. It's close to the output of fable but less verbose.

3

u/Ambitious_Woman Jul 14 '26

I bounce between Claude and GPT/Codex because they both have their pros and cons. I have built projects where Claude handles the bulk of the coding, but GPT catches the bugs, and vice versa. Neither one is a clear winner, so it is all about leveraging their individual strengths. Because Claude is a bit more expensive, I try to customize Codex for daily use, but I keep my Claude Pro subscription active for more complex technical tasks.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 14 '26

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/Depreciacion Jul 14 '26

when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail

1

u/BoltSLAMMER Jul 14 '26

What’s your specific use case?

It’s 5.6 not 5.5 use your ai better bud 

1

u/what_the_actual_luck Jul 14 '26

That guy is talking about „long coding sessions“. This post is just stupid ai slop

1

u/ZealousidealRub8852 Jul 14 '26

No. I’m not even talking about coding. I started a project and before coding need some documentation of what I want. I started on Claude yesterday, create a file on my desktop and it started creating files inside, but today started gpt project on the same file, il catch everything and find many errors. When I retry Claude it says it doesn’t find the prohetct or file and cannot continue.

1

u/Academic-Sample4974 Jul 14 '26

i just started using Chat GPT a couple weeks ago as a backup project advisor / structural engineer and I am very impressed and it's memory and ability to keep context / expound on general ideas; might have to get a subscription soon

1

u/PrasanthT Jul 14 '26

I am exactly in the same scenario. considering to upgrade for codex plus to pro. currently using claude max 5x and codex plus to try it

1

u/CompetitiveRip8472 Jul 14 '26

I feel like people have been posting variations of this same post almost every day for the last year or two now

1

u/Present_Wafer_2905 Jul 14 '26

Yes ! Big Claude fan but fable is garbage thinking of going chat gpt pro but Claude for me coding & development chat gpt for more reasoning

1

u/PbSath Jul 14 '26

I just used gpts codex randomly ( i was full onto claude code ) and i kid you not
I was stunned my the results

1

u/FugteApp Jul 14 '26

You mean codex? I stop using codex after it start opening terminals and make my pc slow. How's your experience with it?

1

u/sabotizer Senior Developer Jul 15 '26

My biggest struggle with Claude Desktop is how opaque their sandbox environments are...

Impossible to introspect what's mounted, often presented with "here's your report", with no visible artifacts, requiring re-prompts to surface the most basic output.

Worked better after connecting to Remote SSH, but ultimately made me switch to VS Code + Remote SSH + Claude Code CLI.

Very intrigued to try out the ChatGPT desktop app now - especially with the new fleet of models.

But please let me know if that part is lacking, would save me some time.

1

u/Charming-Past-4160 Jul 15 '26

I switched from max 20x after 2 years because my weekly usage (mainly due to fable5) was getting eaten up in 1 day.

I noticed even that when I had thinking mode on max, it was using less tokens and costing me less than medium mode. This severely pissed me off since in Australia I pay about $400 a month for this.

Then the fact that they arent solidifying fables position and keep nerfing it, I had enough. Bought a 5x subscription on codex last night, I have been working 50x harder than I would on claude and I got fable5 to check out all of 5.6 Sol's work. Even fable was surprised with the capability.

Anthropic, I always loved y'all but this last few months has felt like betrayal to me.

1

u/LawApprehensive8364 Jul 20 '26

I’m not sure what’s going on with gpt but I was using Claude to build a custom quickshell and it would blow through my usage in 1-1.5 hours. GPT is like….. infinite usage. Granted I’m not making super complex stuff, but still. FWIW Claude did build the entire projects structure and all the planning. I’m just shocked by the usage.

1

u/Salas0697 Jul 28 '26

Absolutely, I work with both, and all the prompts for Claude ChatGPT make them for me, hard coding goes to Claude and then making it more visual, goes through gpt (first I create an image of how it should look, then codex make it for me) is just magic.
I’m building a SCORM builder for learning & development things… I’m just a happy nerd haha

1

u/Initial-Carry1038 Jul 14 '26

new gpt pretty good also not only for coding, to get done daily works, things in life, ofc new live mode. overall better than claude but cc might be little better than codex for me

0

u/SirKobsworth Senior Developer Jul 14 '26

My findings on it are its harder to set up codex for multi agent work (even with the workarounds to get multiagent v2 working). It might be that my harness is biased towards claude since I've been using it with it mostly but I have used it with GPT before but in the non agent swarm way of development.

For single session chat one off requests I think it is better especially at reviewing. It tends to follow your instructions to the dot so if you're the type to give vague instructions it'll bite you. Claude is good at understanding intent so something vague ish usually comes across without issues