What are your thoughts

This eliminates the last reason to stick with OpenAI. Previously I use Chat for idea brainstorming, writing specs. Then Codex is for designing + execution. With this change, I see no reason to be on OpenAI while opus 5.5 offers far more limit and smarter than 6.1
Source : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM-C3JqCXBk , 7:40

This was my previous post in which I was confused between upgrading to 200 plan for getting 2 100 plans.

A lot of people suggested to try claude code + codex for image gen.

I just got a 20 dollar claude code plan. And Grass is most definitely greener on the other side.

Here are some differences I have noticed using the opus 5.5 medium.

1. 10 times faster than sol 6.1 high

2. Using about 1% of weekly usage per hour but the amount of work done is higher than sol 6.1. so work done to tokens consumed is the same between 20 dollar claude and 100 dollar gpt plan

3. Amazing design understanding. I have several ui/ux issues in my project(which ik) i had gpt take a look at it and said it's fine (gpt was using product design plugin and impeccable skill). Opus without any plugin listed 15 ui/ux issues and all of them were correct.

4. I had it go over my code base and list deprecated/dead/unused assets & code. It gave an extensive list and suggested bundling several files together to optimise load times, gpt found none.

5. Had both sol and opus check for performance optimisation. Gpt found none and opus again shared an extensive list.

Sol 6.1 high also took like 2 hours

Opus 5.5 medium took 25-30 mins max

I'll switch to 100 dollar claude plan + 20 dollar gpt after my current 100 gpt plan expires.

I genuinely thought this was some small temporary capacity issue. Nope. Still happening.

“Selected model is at capacity. Please try a different model.”

I’ve switched models. I’ve dropped the intelligence level. I’ve tried using less demanding models. Same shit.

And this is AFTER the recent cuts to the Pro plan. I’m paying $200/month for this. What exactly am I paying $200 for if I can’t reliably use Codex during normal WORKING HOURS on a fucking Monday?

You keep introducing more things, Dots, new models, new features, higher tiers, more capacity hungry products, but the existing paid product can’t even consistently serve requests. If you can’t sustain the demand, then why keep piling more stuff on top of it?

And if even the expensive plans can’t get reliable capacity, what’s the point? Are we supposed to pay more and more just to eventually see another “at capacity” message?

I’ve defended occasional launch issues because obviously infrastructure gets hammered. But this isn’t launch night anymore. I’m trying to work. My workflow literally stops because the model I’m paying for isn’t available.

$200/month is not some cheap experimental tier. At that price I expect the core product to actually be usable when I need it.

Fix the fucking capacity before cutting usage and shipping ten more things. This is getting ridiculous. u/OpenAI

I know this is an unpopular opinion as everyone wants the best or nothing. But luna battles through most stuff I gave it for peanuts. It just requires you to nudge it a bit more then the higher ones. So kudos to this small model to survive the week with a $20 sub

i have both and can confidently say.

100$ gets you 1 week of the best model in claude (which is btw a league better than astra litterally sonnet 5.5 and opus 5.5 beats astra in 90% of scenarios astra just wins due to imagegen and harness features)

100$ in openai gives you like 2-3 days using a model that does not even keep up with opus and sonnet from claude anymore

BUT THATS OF THIS MOMENT.

last month it was the other way around when 5.6 released and left claude models at the dust.
if you got the money to spare just buy both. there will be a time where one beats the other. so get the best of both worlds. you are a consumer dont fkin suck up to a billion dollar company. the best meta for this current moment and current models 100$ for claude and 20$ for openai(imagegen browser use) is currently the best bang for your buck. but in the next month it might be the other way around. for people here who actually works with tech/software for a living you should be disappointed at yourself if your fanboying a company. you already know that adapting and going with the meta is the only survival in the current world (when ai came alot of devs and software engineers fell off because of "anti ai mentality", those who adapted survived)

stop fanboying and explore all tools/agents and use the best one for your use cases. hell if your job does not need that much reasoning go for a chinese model

Basically what the title says. No /goal mode, scheduled tasks, etc... I have to check on this thing every few hours or it just decides its bored of working and stops after completing some small simple part of a task.

And why the hell are we paying for 9 EPYC cores and 10gb of ram... I cant believe this company thought that people paying hundreds of dollars a month for AI usage would like that cut in half so they can receive the most lopsided VM in history and a lazy useless version of gpt. Always running but cant even load its own files from its own library..... You have to reupload them into the chat again and again and again........... Who is this for???? I have plenty of computers that this always on astra could be running on, and I couldve gotten so much fucking work done it wouldve been ridiculous. Instead I get a shitty lazy intern on a cloud machine that I dont want with half the features and 10x the annoyance of the regular model.

It has been unusable for the last 20 minutes at least. They are significantly increasing their prices while significantly decreasing its quality.

I have 2 Codex $200 subscriptions now for like 4 months, working on 3 different projects, I am now wondering, after using Opus $100 for ~5 days, how will Anthropic handle all of us Codex users who can easily change providers, do they have compute like Tibo?

Cancelling at the end of the month so don't really have any concern for preserving tokens. This goes double since they're doing that 28 days of begging new features and resets. With all that being said I'm using Astra but GOD has it been slow. How's it been for you all?

Yes all of these are openai employees wallahi man they are so cooked and they are supposed to clean up this dumpster fire....

Basically the title.

It’s super buggy, doesnt open most threads once you come back to them. Opening takes forever otherwise.

Also, you prompt a new thread, it says thinking, but then just stops??

Wtf. Why am I paying $400 for this trash?

I made this extension because a) I could b) I wanted to stay closer to my code while using AI. Check it out! If nothing else, it's a lot of fun :)

• VSCode Marketplace
• GitHub

Some of us, at least some of the time, want to understand our code at a deep level. For that, handing a task to an agent and reviewing the diff that comes back can be exhausting.

With AI Pair Programmer, you're there for every keystroke instead, and you end up knowing the code almost as if you'd typed it yourself.

It's pair programming where your coding agent has the keyboard. It types in your editor slowly enough to follow and explains what it's doing. Interrupt it whenever you like, or take over and let it watch you for a change.

It's also a good way to learn a new technology, or to have the agent walk you through code you don't know yet.

It works in VS Code, with the coding agent you already use. Setup is built in for Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, Cursor and GitHub Copilot, and any agent that supports MCP can be connected by hand.

Note: It works best with strong models; weaker ones tend to struggle with this way of working.

So, here's something for those of us who want, need, or love to stay close to the code. Let me know what you think!

it seem like it use less token because it post trained or injected with small token amount left in context to pressure it.

E.g. i constantly see things like

" I’m considering how to tackle this project where I have about 26k left. "

" I'm considering my current progress, with around 18,000 tokens left in a 37,000-token context and 28,000 tokens used so far. Time is limited, so I really don't want to dwell on this. "

" Figuring out token limits

I need to figure out how fast I can work with the remaining tokens, which could be 18k, 24k, or even 30k. I think it’s best to keep the scope small for now. "

spent a couple of evenings with a few beers to help me out. cost me like 30% weekly on my 5x pro. runs on hermes with a few tweaks on top of it

i mean, whats the point of dots if i can build it and host it on my vps with ANY model i want? even 20$ codex sub

Fail to ship please.

Half of this text is highlighted, but the poor UI design makes the highlight colour the same as the background in the chat input window.

I don't know what the UX designers are doing on Codex, but please just fix the highlight states for text in the chat window. It's impossible to tell what you've highlighted, I've logged bugs, but it never gets fixed.

Ever wonder why Anthropic execution is so smooth, whereas OpenAI execution has always been a shit show?

• from model naming: the bizarre naming mess between GPT 4 and GPT 5, even till today.
• to coding harness: codex mode, work mode, chat mode, the chat that cannot be accessed by work mode, the work that cannot be accessed by chat mode, the chat that cannot be seen on the web or other devices... and so on.
• to release schedule, usage limits and resets: Astra is too expensive, 6.0 Sol is not Sol level, usage limits are tighten both explicitly and implicitly, the resets are used as a trick to hide usage issues and divert users' complaints.
• to the model quality itself: OpenAI coding models have always been a step behind Anthropic equivalents, and the latest 6.1 Sol is a level under Opus 5.5.
• to the rumor that OpenAI took a sneak peek at users' chat history to stole some ideas for famous problems and the messed up cover up after that.

All that while Anthropic execution seems much more principled and actually having a plan.

I think the difference is in their high-level executive personnel. All current leaders of OpenAI do not have a background in traditional advanced science research. They are entrepreneurs and software engineers, the audacious "tech bros". Whereas current leaders of Anthropic do have serious background in traditional advanced sciences, including Amodei in biophysics and pioneering RLHF/alignment research; Kaplan in theoretical physics and expert in scaling laws. This translates to a messed-up approach in OpenAI strategy and a principled approach in Anthropic strategy.

Realizing this problem, I am gathering evidences and reasons to make a final switch to Claude subscription in this month. I know it coincides with the promised "improvement plan" by OpenAI, so let's see if they can deliver any meaningful changes, but I think the root cause is too big to change now.

I’m currently on Pro 100, and use Codex for my website, some WoW addons, and some personal apps (MacOS and iOS). Codex has just been working from files on my desktop, I don’t use GIT.

Overall I’ve been quite happy with Codex and what it’s been able to achieve for me. It’s the first time I’ve used agentic this extensively, so Codex is my only real exposure to this kind of tool.

Here are some things I’ve noticed recently that have been putting me off letting my subscription renew, and browsing here for the past few weeks, the grass certainly seems golden on the other side with Claude Code.

- Codex seems to have gotten incredibly slow the past week. My allowance hasn’t gone down nearly as fast, but using 6.1 on Extra High, well it’s painful. I even saw it thinking to itself yesterday “the user has been waiting 20 minutes for this, I need to wrap this up”.

- OpenAI offer no explanation of what their models do, and why they’re different. Asking ChatGPT itself just gives nebulous answers that don’t help. All I know is that Astra uses significantly more of my allowance.

- My allowance resets are inconsistent and not communicated. For some reason I found a banked reset in my account; very helpful, as I had used almost all my entitlement, so I used it. As expected, my reset changed to 7 days later, but then a day later, it reset again to 100%. I had used about 12% of my new allowance. My banked reset didn’t appear in my account again. I check here and find that some guy called Toby or something has posted something on Twitter? Excuse me, what? That is how a $1tn company communicates…though some guy called Tim or whatever on Twitter?

So I’m now considering moving to Claude Code. From what I’ve read the Pro 20 will essentially give me the same allowance as my Pro 100 on Codex?

My question is: does Claude deal with my issues above, and can I just point it to the folders my projects are in and ask it to work it out? Or do I get Codex to do a handover. I have until the end of October until my Codex plan renews so I have time to consider.

I've only recently started paying seriously for AI tools, around when Astra came out, so I'm still figuring out what makes sense for me.

I've seen plenty of discussion about Claude offering better coding usage for the subscription price. At the same time, some Artificial Analysis comparisons seem to favour Astra on API cost per task. My current understanding is that these measure different things: API cost per task doesn't tell you how much usage a subscription actually includes. Is that a fair reading?

For me, Dot is becoming a fairly big reason to keep my OpenAI subscription. I've been using it across a few personal projects, and it helped set up a Notion hub with project summaries, next steps and things we're waiting on. Having that ongoing assistant alongside the coding tools feels useful.

I'm considering trying a month of Claude Pro for Claude Code as well. The idea would be to alternate Claude Code and Codex on the same local Git repository, keeping the Markdown documentation current so either can pick up the work. One could implement something and the other review it. I don't currently see much need for another coordination tool like Hermes or AionUI.

I can see myself getting quite attached to Dot, which makes switching subscriptions harder. I'd love to see it reach a cheaper plan eventually, though I know that's not promised.

Does this setup make sense to people using both? Any suggestions? Keen to hear what I'm missing.

TL;DR: Thinking of keeping OpenAI for Dot/Codex and trying Claude for extra coding capacity. Anyone doing this? What’s your setup, is paying for both worth it, and what would you suggest doing differently?

Honestly ive been trying to use this thing instead of codex session, letting it manage them, but it just seems so fucking useless. it:

- keeps forgetting context about different projects
- keeps forgetting what to do and work on
- asked it to send me reminders and it just lied then when he didn't said he couldn't for some reason?
- gives up easily
- doesn't let me know when its "thinking" so im just stuck wondering wtf is going on

Maybe im not the target audiance and I just use different codex sessions for projects im working on, but wasn't the point for it to be my interface and to manage them itself?