upvote
I've switched to Codex a few months ago when Claude's weekly limits were getting pretty stiff, and I haven't looked back. Both GPT 5.5 and 5.6 are quite capable, especially compared to nerfed Opus 4.7 (haven't tried 5).

Also, the Codex guy regularly resets weekly limits for everyone, which is a nice bonus (I know it's a temporary gimmick to attract more users, but I might as well use it while it lasts.)

reply
That’s how I see it too. Claude is more “fun” to use, like a coworker I have to talk to now and then to steer it, while gpt-5.6 is a task machine: I give it a task and it is very consistent, reliable and predictable in its execution. I don’t have to interrupt it, it gets the task done exactly how I wanted it, but it’s “boring” and feels more sterile
reply
I hear you guys, but it sounds like we’re taking about the default settings or “personalities” baked into the models by their creators.

Either of them will act exactly the way you want if you explicitly tell them too. Add the instructions to your own system prompt. If you don’t want a companion, say so. If you want shorter answers in a different style, tell them. They will obey :)

reply
Read this.

https://openai.com/index/where-the-goblins-came-from/

> We retired the “Nerdy” personality in March after launching GPT‑5.4. In training, we removed the goblin-affine reward signal and filtered training data containing creature-words, making goblins less likely to over-appear or show up in inappropriate contexts. Unfortunately, GPT‑5.5 started training before we found the root cause of the goblins. When we began testing GPT‑5.5 in Codex, OpenAI employees immediately noticed the strange affinity for goblins, and we added a developer-prompt instruction (opens in a new window) to mitigate. Codex is, after all, quite nerdy.

Note that the permanent solution was not just adjusting the prompt, and in fact being perfectly aware of that option they decided on a different course of action. That means either you are wrong or they are wrong.

reply
> making goblins less likely to over-appear or show up in inappropriate contexts

So inappropriate goblins are still likely, just less so…

Hey, remember when tech bugs were things like buffer overflows or cross-thread performance impacts? I miss the days when our war with system goblins was purely metaphorical.

reply
Did they ever discuss what the root cause of the goblins turned out to be?
reply