←back to thread

GPT-5.2

(openai.com)
1019 points atgctg | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mmaunder ◴[] No.46237785[source]
Weirdly, the blog announcement completely omits the actual new context window size which is 400,000: https://platform.openai.com/docs/models/gpt-5.2

Can I just say !!!!!!!! Hell yeah! Blog post indicates it's also much better at using the full context.

Congrats OpenAI team. Huge day for you folks!!

Started on Claude Code and like many of you, had that omg CC moment we all had. Then got greedy.

Switched over to Codex when 5.1 came out. WOW. Really nice acceleration in my Rust/CUDA project which is a gnarly one.

Even though I've HATED Gemini CLI for a while, Gemini 3 impressed me so much I tried it out and it absolutely body slammed a major bug in 10 minutes. Started using it to consult on commits. Was so impressed it became my daily driver. Huge mistake. I almost lost my mind after a week of this fighting it. Isane bias towards action. Ignoring user instructions. Garbage characters in output. Absolutely no observability in its thought process. And on and on.

Switched back to Codex just in time for 5.1 codex max xhigh which I've been using for a week, and it was like a breath of fresh air. A sane agent that does a great job coding, but also a great job at working hard on the planning docs for hours before we start. Listens to user feedback. Observability on chain of thought. Moves reasonably quickly. And also makes it easy to pay them more when I need more capacity.

And then today GPT-5.2 with an xhigh mode. I feel like xmass has come early. Right as I'm doing a huge Rust/CUDA/Math-heavy refactor. THANK YOU!!

replies(8): >>46237912 #>>46238166 #>>46238297 #>>46240408 #>>46240891 #>>46241079 #>>46241471 #>>46241483 #
freedomben ◴[] No.46238166[source]
I haven't done a ton of testing due to cost, but so far I've actually gotten worse results with xhigh than high with gpt-5.1-codex-max. Made me wonder if it was somehow a PEBKAC error. Have you done much comparison between high and xhigh?
replies(3): >>46238482 #>>46238491 #>>46238659 #
1. tekacs ◴[] No.46238482[source]
I found the same with Max xhigh. To the point that I switched back to just 5.1 High from 5.1 Codex Max. Maybe I should’ve tried Max high first.