I’m using both Claude and codex to develop a game as a personal project. I’m using the $20 tier for both. Now to preface this is not about trying to do a one side sucks the other side is great thing. But in my experience codex has been significantly better and I’m not sure if that’s because I’m using Claude wrong or if they just are better at different things. An average example is implementing a new feature. I always clarify at the end of my prompts to ask questions about design and architectural choices. If I ask Claude it will generate a plan and ask a few questions, but it will end up making a lot of assumptions. If I try to work with it to update the plan (even with ultra think) it ends up burning a lot of tokens, often getting confused, and making incredibly verbose plans that are difficult to read. I’ve often found errors in the plan that I feel will be easier to either just implement them fix later because the effort of getting Claude to change the plan isn’t worth it, or I’ll just ask codex to do this feature instead. Codex on the other hand is much better at this type of iteration, it generally asks more and better questions, and when I provide feedback on plans it’s much better updating them, also it’s plans are shorter and more readable. So my main question is this, has anyone else been experiencing this problem, is there a different way you guys recommend using Claude or solutions to what I’m encountering? When it comes to actually implementing code, I’d say Claude and codecs are pretty comparable but for planning the differences night and day. (I generally use GPT 5.5, and for Claude I used to use opus and I tried again with 4.8, But it didn’t seem worth it after struggling to make cohesive plans so I generally stick with sonnet these days for more direct implementations) submitted by /u/Rowboat_of_Theseus
Originally posted by u/Rowboat_of_Theseus on r/ClaudeCode