Obvious political reasons and implications aside, a clear quality gap opened up late last year when Opus 4.5 was released vs. GPT-5. Opus was obviously and demonstrably superior to any GPT-5 tier. The release of GPT-5.2 didn't improve matters, and then Opus 4.6 widened the gap further. Right now talking to GPT-5.2 Pro is 10x slower than chatting with Opus 4.6 and the output returned is, nevertheless, generally lower quality and more "sloppy."
What I'm getting at is that this could be, in part, because Claude is genuinely better at this point in time.
Weirdly enough, I agree with both sides. Opus beats every version of GPT 5 as a chat interface, hands down. ChatGPT, at this point, is mostly me correcting its output style, cadence, behavior, etc, and consistently remaining dissatisfied, meanwhile Opus one-shots things I didn’t even think it could (Typst code).
All that said, I do my programming in OpenAI’s Codex app for Mac. It has completely dominated Claude Code for me. I’ll only ever use Opus to check 5.3-Codex’s work.
Very weird world we’re living in. I hope it gets even weirder once Deepseek does whatever they’ve been cooking.
What where you using it for? claude is really good at agentic stuff, Pure coding, I can see codex being better, but for the entire workflow, I'm not sure
I use Codex purely for coding, and that's 90% of my use case for AI in general (10% using ChatGPT web for misc stuff). I pop out to Opus in Claude Code regularly to try to stay up on their relative performance, but so far the primary value I've been able to derive from CC is as a second set of eyes for code review / poking holes in plans. For primary planning / debugging / implementation Codex outclasses it atm sadly.
Me too. It's great that my employer pays for it and there's basically no budget, because this configuration is 10x more expensive than the regular default Sonnet.
Agree on the gap - in my own complex greenfield software dev spec test, opus 4.6 blows codex 5.3 out of the water, by wide margin, both in ui and backend.
Massivly better and I cannot understand how many comments online say that they're comparable (other than paid actors which now fits the right wing angle that OpenAI takes because right wing paid online comments seems quite common overall).
I remember on the Opus 4.5 release data watching what it can do to my test app I wanted it to build and saying outloud to myself "oh shit" because of how much better it was at the conversation, planning, understanding, and building. Posts like this[0] say similar things, where Opus 4.5 release + Claude Code was the tipping point and the gap is widening and Anthropic has infinite more momentum and going in the better direction with useful models that aren't fully aligned with bad actors.
Yep. For the past month I’ve been doing this thing where every time I need something from AI, I give Opus and Codex the same prompt. Opus is just better by a wide margin, especially on complex tasks. It uses tools quite a lot, taps into available MCP servers when it makes sense, and can think about repercussions down the line much better. Codex I feel is optimized for brevity, approaching terseness. Hard to put my finger on it but it’s never as thorough and it always misses important details.
no, it is because of the public perspection of Anthropic holding a principled stance against allowing their software to pull the trigger and kill humans. ChatGPT still has the bigger brand name recognition.
Anyone who's used both Claude and ChatGPT will instantly agree what is better by a large margin. Theres maybe a brand recognition long tail but its more likely theyre the rare occasional users who use the free tier. Thus ChatGPT is becoming the shitty free AI app while Claude is what you use to get real work done. Time (in months) will tell yow this will go.
If that's entirely the case, there could still be interesting implications, as people who switch to Claude are unlikely to switch back to ChatGPT in the near future. (If, that is, they regularly use LLMs for any technical or professional task.)
Well, apparently they give you some miniscule rewards points for meeting step or activity goals. I told my wife who was immediately intrigued. Pump out more apps that appeal to women.
This does not check out for me intuitively. You are telling me Dick's sporting goods with 800 stores was able to get to the top of the app store leaderboard, which companies spend a lot of effort and money on, against the largest AI behemoths, by giving rewards on activity goals? I think it has to be something else.
United healthcare does that too and it’s great because it’s just straight cash on a visa gift card. Like 1.25 a week for just doing your normal stuff and more for hitting other goals. Easy to rig too…
I did not realise there are ads for LLMs. Of course if I thought about it, I would conclude that there must be. But somehow the concept seems strange to me. What do they advertise? The LLM can do so many different things… I guess they are all “welcome! To the world of tomorrow!”
Then again, I know nothing about ads these days. Last time I had any ad exposure was twenty years ago, when I lived at home with my parents.
I've previously seen some ads for Claude on YouTube, mainly following the style of a programmer influencer talking about it. But I'm more of a technical audience.
Though, I happened to be watching the Superbowl, and Anthropic was all in taking pot shots at OpenAI's recent decision to start incorperating ads. Very much addressed towards a general audience. Here's one of them for example: https://youtu.be/FBSam25u8O4
I’m not sure why everybody else likes it, but for me, the Move feature gives me 3 points per day for doing what I already do (10k steps, 3mi run, or 30 active minutes). It makes the $10 rewards flow in more quickly.
I'd just been using the free version of OpenAI for my easy tasks, so as not to waste my Claude credits on them. About time I deleted it and gave it the poor review it deserves.
rsync.net is (minimally) an openai customer. I've used it mostly as a curiosity but others here have used it in more professional manner.
When we created the account we shared essentially zero personal information and used a purpose-specific email, etc. No ID scans, no passports, no robust ID verification. It is a company account, after all, so it would make no sense to tie it to a particular person ...
All of this to ask:
In 2026, if I choose to boycott openAI on behalf of my firm, and perhaps sign up for Claude with the intention of using either the web interface or a terminal CLI ... what will be demanded in terms of identity and personal information ?
I am one of the people who uninstalled ChatGPT and closed their account and installed Claude in the last 24 hours. I know plenty of others who did the same. I wonder whether this trend can be sustained.
As usual, the corporations benefiting from supporting war and subverting the rights of everyday citizens is rewarded by massive subsidies by the capitalist state.
Anthropic currently is winning the public sentiment war, but OpenAI is being established as another to-big-to-fail capitalist regime institution.
Obvious political reasons and implications aside, a clear quality gap opened up late last year when Opus 4.5 was released vs. GPT-5. Opus was obviously and demonstrably superior to any GPT-5 tier. The release of GPT-5.2 didn't improve matters, and then Opus 4.6 widened the gap further. Right now talking to GPT-5.2 Pro is 10x slower than chatting with Opus 4.6 and the output returned is, nevertheless, generally lower quality and more "sloppy."
What I'm getting at is that this could be, in part, because Claude is genuinely better at this point in time.
I just cancelled my OpenAI $200 sub yesterday because of all this, but sadly I can't agree.
Codex 5.3 Xhigh > Opus 4.6 in my work to this point.
Hoping for Opus 4.7 or whatever comes next to rectify this as I'm a bit annoyed over having to drop to a lower quality model.
Weirdly enough, I agree with both sides. Opus beats every version of GPT 5 as a chat interface, hands down. ChatGPT, at this point, is mostly me correcting its output style, cadence, behavior, etc, and consistently remaining dissatisfied, meanwhile Opus one-shots things I didn’t even think it could (Typst code). All that said, I do my programming in OpenAI’s Codex app for Mac. It has completely dominated Claude Code for me. I’ll only ever use Opus to check 5.3-Codex’s work. Very weird world we’re living in. I hope it gets even weirder once Deepseek does whatever they’ve been cooking.
What where you using it for? claude is really good at agentic stuff, Pure coding, I can see codex being better, but for the entire workflow, I'm not sure
I use Codex purely for coding, and that's 90% of my use case for AI in general (10% using ChatGPT web for misc stuff). I pop out to Opus in Claude Code regularly to try to stay up on their relative performance, but so far the primary value I've been able to derive from CC is as a second set of eyes for code review / poking holes in plans. For primary planning / debugging / implementation Codex outclasses it atm sadly.
For coding, I agree, Codex-5.3 is the best out there.
But for the chat, I feel like ChatGPT got worse and worse.
I use Opus 4.6 Fast-mode. It produces significantly better results in my work than any Codex 5.3 tier.
Me too. It's great that my employer pays for it and there's basically no budget, because this configuration is 10x more expensive than the regular default Sonnet.
Rapid iteration would possibly make up for the drop in quality, but I can't afford to use fast mode as I'm a contractor and pay for my own AI usage :(
Agree on the gap - in my own complex greenfield software dev spec test, opus 4.6 blows codex 5.3 out of the water, by wide margin, both in ui and backend.
Massivly better and I cannot understand how many comments online say that they're comparable (other than paid actors which now fits the right wing angle that OpenAI takes because right wing paid online comments seems quite common overall).
I remember on the Opus 4.5 release data watching what it can do to my test app I wanted it to build and saying outloud to myself "oh shit" because of how much better it was at the conversation, planning, understanding, and building. Posts like this[0] say similar things, where Opus 4.5 release + Claude Code was the tipping point and the gap is widening and Anthropic has infinite more momentum and going in the better direction with useful models that aren't fully aligned with bad actors.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46515696
Yep. For the past month I’ve been doing this thing where every time I need something from AI, I give Opus and Codex the same prompt. Opus is just better by a wide margin, especially on complex tasks. It uses tools quite a lot, taps into available MCP servers when it makes sense, and can think about repercussions down the line much better. Codex I feel is optimized for brevity, approaching terseness. Hard to put my finger on it but it’s never as thorough and it always misses important details.
no, it is because of the public perspection of Anthropic holding a principled stance against allowing their software to pull the trigger and kill humans. ChatGPT still has the bigger brand name recognition.
Anyone who's used both Claude and ChatGPT will instantly agree what is better by a large margin. Theres maybe a brand recognition long tail but its more likely theyre the rare occasional users who use the free tier. Thus ChatGPT is becoming the shitty free AI app while Claude is what you use to get real work done. Time (in months) will tell yow this will go.
If that's entirely the case, there could still be interesting implications, as people who switch to Claude are unlikely to switch back to ChatGPT in the near future. (If, that is, they regularly use LLMs for any technical or professional task.)
Open AI had first mover advantage.
Sam squandered it.
I guarantee you the people downloading these apps aren't thinking about that. They use what works best.
How would most people know what works best? Most people are only using one.
https://old.reddit.com/comments/1rh60py
https://www.windowscentral.com/artificial-intelligence/cance...
The real story here is "how the hell did Dick's Sporting Goods get to #3 and how can I get me some of their magic dust?"
Well, apparently they give you some miniscule rewards points for meeting step or activity goals. I told my wife who was immediately intrigued. Pump out more apps that appeal to women.
This does not check out for me intuitively. You are telling me Dick's sporting goods with 800 stores was able to get to the top of the app store leaderboard, which companies spend a lot of effort and money on, against the largest AI behemoths, by giving rewards on activity goals? I think it has to be something else.
United healthcare does that too and it’s great because it’s just straight cash on a visa gift card. Like 1.25 a week for just doing your normal stuff and more for hitting other goals. Easy to rig too…
I think their ads are better than chatgpt’s. I’ve seen them more recently encouraging people to “keep thinking” and use it to improve themselves
I did not realise there are ads for LLMs. Of course if I thought about it, I would conclude that there must be. But somehow the concept seems strange to me. What do they advertise? The LLM can do so many different things… I guess they are all “welcome! To the world of tomorrow!”
Then again, I know nothing about ads these days. Last time I had any ad exposure was twenty years ago, when I lived at home with my parents.
I've previously seen some ads for Claude on YouTube, mainly following the style of a programmer influencer talking about it. But I'm more of a technical audience.
Though, I happened to be watching the Superbowl, and Anthropic was all in taking pot shots at OpenAI's recent decision to start incorperating ads. Very much addressed towards a general audience. Here's one of them for example: https://youtu.be/FBSam25u8O4
I don't know, the one with the simple minds song was pretty good.
Why is Dick's Sporting Goods in the top 3?
It has a step counter in it that gives you loyalty points. So people are walking around all day with the app running to get a free pair of shoes.
I’m not sure why everybody else likes it, but for me, the Move feature gives me 3 points per day for doing what I already do (10k steps, 3mi run, or 30 active minutes). It makes the $10 rewards flow in more quickly.
It's just $10 every ~3 months, right? Not nothing, and at no real cost, but surprising how much people care.
https://ads.apple.com/app-store
Here's a recent tweet with 1.7MM views pointing out that you can get gift cards just by connecting it to Apple Fitness and being active: https://x.com/edgaralandough/status/2026279637911736585
they were having a sale on jock straps.
I'd just been using the free version of OpenAI for my easy tasks, so as not to waste my Claude credits on them. About time I deleted it and gave it the poor review it deserves.
I just searched the play store to download claude myself. I had to scroll a page and a half past sex bot apps to find it.
Meanwhile I have a working desktop app but this magic email link nonsense doesnt seem to work on my phone.
I've never looked at the app store rankings before. Number 3 is a app for buying shoes? That seems quite specific.
This is a sure sign we’re nearing the shoe event horizon (https://hitchhikers.fandom.com/wiki/Shoe_Event_Horizon and audio https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nEI19kJ5GfU )
People will always need shoes.
Yeah, dropped ChatGPT today. Downloaded the desktop version of Claude.
I won't go back.
rsync.net is (minimally) an openai customer. I've used it mostly as a curiosity but others here have used it in more professional manner.
When we created the account we shared essentially zero personal information and used a purpose-specific email, etc. No ID scans, no passports, no robust ID verification. It is a company account, after all, so it would make no sense to tie it to a particular person ...
All of this to ask:
In 2026, if I choose to boycott openAI on behalf of my firm, and perhaps sign up for Claude with the intention of using either the web interface or a terminal CLI ... what will be demanded in terms of identity and personal information ?
As Sydney Sweeney demonstrated, going MAGA is a bad marketing strategy and in the end just loses money
ChatGPT and Gemini's coding capabilities are being left in the dust they'd better catch up or be irrelevant fast.
I wonder if this is related to the Pentagon incident. Dario's interview with the CBS has a lot of views too.
That’s what happens when a bunch of us delete our OpenAI accounts, delete ChatGPT, and download Claude
Too bad we can't see the top deleted App
And Dick's Sporting Goods beats Google Gemini to become the 3rd app on US App Store, like what are we doing here?
Dick’s Sporting Goods is objectively more useful than Gemini.
What's wrong with Dick's Sporting Goods?
OpenAI bribed Trump: https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-whole-thing-was-scam
Considering App Store Ranking is based on recent volume, this just says that a lot of people download Claude over ChatGPT in the last 24-48 hours.
This a nothing burger
I am one of the people who uninstalled ChatGPT and closed their account and installed Claude in the last 24 hours. I know plenty of others who did the same. I wonder whether this trend can be sustained.
I dislike OpenAI as much as anyone else, but I doubt this trend will be sustained, and I also doubt this will have any huge impact in numbers.
Most people just don't care.
As usual, the corporations benefiting from supporting war and subverting the rights of everyday citizens is rewarded by massive subsidies by the capitalist state.
Anthropic currently is winning the public sentiment war, but OpenAI is being established as another to-big-to-fail capitalist regime institution.
For 50 years we've known EVERYTHING Trump touches turns to mierde.
Sam thought he was special. He is not.
It was inevitable.