GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

https://twitter.com/thsottiaux/status/2073933490513752151

by mfiguiere • 17 days ago

415 392 17 days ago

twitter.com

https://x.com/haider1/status/2073695124220006575, https://xcancel.com/haider1/status/2073695124220006575

postalcoder• 17 days ago

I wonder if it's related that that OpenAI has found a way to cut inference costs by half, according to The Information.

https://www.theinformation.com/newsletters/ai-agenda/openai-...

drivebyhooting• 17 days ago

What’s the technique? And did they buy it from thinking machines?

turtleyacht2• 17 days ago

Maybe cache similar answers from others. Surprised if this is not already being done.

layla5alive4• 17 days ago

https://archive.ph/NEwVz

"However, these inference optimizations, which rival Anthropic refers to as “compute multipliers,” are a big focus for all the labs. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has been publicly talking about the concept since at least mid-2023, when he said on a podcast that the company limits “the number of people who are aware of a given compute multiplier” because it could give other AI labs a leg up if they were to be able to replicate them. (Compute multipliers can also refer to efficiency optimizations in the model-training phase.)"

Yes, on a world with finite resources where your industry is singlehandedly siphoning ALL THE RESOURCES - hoard general efficiency optimizations and treat them as trade secrets - winning is all that matters, normal people and other species and the planet be damned.

Everything I hear about Dario these days makes me like him less and less. He sure did seem to speed run the 'tech leader with scruples' to 'tech villain' path! I guess all the cycles are compressing as we approach the singularity..

razodactyl• 17 days ago

Not sure I know where I fall regarding your point: Yes to trade secrets, but also science and AI should be for the good of all.

OpenAI seems to be trading roles back with Anthropic becoming misanthropic. I hope they both start heading in the direction of how the AI field was prior to LLMs.

Collaboration and benefit for all should always be the primary motivator.

bigyabai6• 17 days ago

He sure did seem to speed run the 'tech leader with scruples' to 'tech villain' path!

What kind of rosy-eyed chump believes in the "tech leader with scruples" bullshit? It always lies.

Did some people just ignore Mark Zuckerberg and Tim Cook's sociopathy, somehow? Did anyone buy into their "privacy is a human right" nonsense?

llelouch3• 17 days ago

Dario tells the truth. If you look at everything through their safe AGI mission it all makes sense. They are not bs'ing about that. Also I think most people just read headlines or 10 second clips and make false extrapolations from there.

(BTW Anthropic only exists because Sam Altman is a liar, Dario admitted this.)

alightsoul14• 17 days ago

i really hope it's just what Deepseek V4 does. Deepseek V4 is very cheap and highly performant

OpenAI tried to pull off the same trade secret thing with RL when they announced o1 and o3, aka "Compute time scaling". Then Deepseek revealed it with Deepseek R1.

Could also be something like Deepseek DSpark. Or using diffusion like DiffusionGemma as a draft model. The timing between the release of those, and this article, makes me think its maybe one or both of those things

KronisLV• 17 days ago

the company limits “the number of people who are aware of a given compute multiplier” because it could give other AI labs a leg up if they were to be able to replicate them.

I wonder if that makes sense if the orgs within the industry are starting to shift their mindset towards "Tokens are expensive, we should use AI less." which feels like an existential threat to the status quo, if those AI providers can't find ways to keep costs affordable for their clients. Otherwise those orgs would just be using GLM 5.2 or DeepSeek V4 Pro but it seems like what they're doing instead is trying to use AI just less, period.

bloppe5• 17 days ago

I agree that Dario is pretty annoying, but I think the "tech villain" archetype is essentially survivorship bias. The tech leaders who don't act that way are not nearly as visible because they're not nearly as successful.

stingraycharles3• 17 days ago

Ok I’m not sure I follow your point here. Isn’t all that he’s saying that if they find some optimization techniques, that gives them an edge? And that makes sense?

How is this suddenly evidence of him being a villain?

schnitzelstoat2• 17 days ago

It gives them a massive advantage because they can cut the cost per token by a lot and eat Anthropic's market share.

In what universe is any company going to give that advantage away?

In any case if they take away a lot of market share it's basically the same in the end - most people will be using these optimisations.

alecco• 17 days ago

And Anthropic sure reads and applies all the open research.

This 2023 thread about this issue is prescient: https://old.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/11sboh1/d_... (just add Anthropic to OpenAI)

cyanydeez4• 16 days ago

Keep in mind, these tech leaders have deluded themselves with the infinite jest of "effective altrusim" which can effective ignore any problem today for some imagined future problem that they're solving. So if they have to enslave the human race because there's a super killer asteroid 10 million lightyears away heading towards us, they'll do it, because obviously, saving future humanity is the only thing that makes sense (because only their genius can save the day)!

minimaxir• 17 days ago

Semi-related, has anyone noticed their GPT 5.5 usage in Codex being cut in half as of a couple days ago? I got a lot more mileage out of my session usage yesterday for the same workload.

oxmom• 17 days ago

I've noticed less quota and 5.5 intelligence degrading. I didn't run the analysis like the post the other day, but I had noticed decreasing ability to complete tasks, more laziness. Switched back to 5.4 and it's much better. Maybe they're getting ready to launch 5.6?

https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/30364

neon_diogenes2• 16 days ago

Yes, I’ve noticed the same thing recently. Yesterday I burned through four 5-hour usage-limit resets in roughly four hours of wall-clock time. Same workflow, but it feels like I’m getting about half the mileage now, maybe even less.

Guess that means Sol is dropping soon..

torginus• 17 days ago

I wonder if AI labs are actively manipulating the narrative (and thus investor sentiment) by airing problems, and then solving them weeks to months later. I wouldn't be surprised if they have a lot of stuff figured out that is not included in the current version, just to make a steady product cycle with years of tangible improvements from one version to another (this is a common practice in the industry).

For example, if inference isn't too expensive, but they figure out how to cut costs, then price goes down. After all, why pay OpenAI when a smaller datacenter can give you similar models?

But, if they make a huge issue about how inference is too expensive, they engineer a crisis of their own creation - then, once they deploy the solution (which they might already have), then they're back on top.

andai3• 17 days ago

For context:

Additionally, we’re introducing a new ultra mode that goes beyond the capabilities of a single agent by leveraging subagents to accelerate complex work.

https://openai.com/index/previewing-gpt-5-6-sol/

Can someone explain how this compares with Pro? I thought Pro was already something similar.

ludamad• 17 days ago

I imagine this is something like Anthropic's dynamic workflows where a JS file is created to make a little AI harness on the spot

andai3• 17 days ago

Wow, I hadn't heard of this!

  const audits = await pipeline(found.files, file =>
    agent(`Audit ${file} for missing authentication checks.`, { label: file }),
  )

I asked Claude in the browser if it could do anything like that. It wrote a little frontend app that calls the Anthropic API (with fetch()), without including a key. I expected that to fail, but it worked!

Apparently in the web chat (and also in Claude Code?[0] Though I haven't tried yet) they can call the Anthropic API and your subscription key gets auto-magicked into the requests somehow.

Those are two separate things of course (aside from the key-injection) but I guess there's no reason it couldn't run completely in the front-end... hmm...

[0] https://code.claude.com/docs/en/workflows

changoplatanero2• 17 days ago

For pro mode the agents worked independently and only when they all finished did a new agent take a look at everything to merge the work into a single response. The new thing involves subagents that have been trained to cooperatively pursue a task and are allowed to communicate with each other along the way.

dools3• 17 days ago

I tried a pro model out the other day and thought there must have been a bug in Pi’s cost calculations. But no, it’s absolutely fucking insane. Wasn’t even any better at the task.

thomasahle2• 17 days ago

Do you have a source for this, or just rumors?

The responses I get from pro don't feel like ensembles. They are often very one directional.

ilsubyeega• 17 days ago

i would believe this will be matched with something like orchestrator-focused model: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48624782

gbnwl• 17 days ago

How is this any different than what we have already? We've had this ability for ages (6+ months, decades in the AI world), you can literally today easily prompt CC or Codex to use subagents to accomplish tasks and they'll do it well. My entire workflow is one top level orchestrator chat creating tickets to dispatch to subagents to implement, and other subagents to verify. Why is this being sold as a new thing? Have HN users never tried tried asking CC or Codex to use subagents?

UnfitFootprint• 17 days ago

The top comment on the thread explains this will involve subagent to subagent comms.

To what effect I don’t know… I thought subagents were useful because they were explicitly single purpose and bound to a narrow context

ai_fry_ur_brain• 17 days ago

Because most people need complexity to be wrapped in a simple UI/UX. Most people just want the one-two button press and be on their way.

tfehring• 17 days ago

I assume this is ~equivalent to ultracode in Claude Code, which can deploy a tree of hundreds of nested subagents and was just released experimentally 5 weeks ago IIRC.

davedx• 16 days ago

I'd love to read more about how to use this workflow. What kind of top level instructions does this actually work with? Is there an article out there with some concrete examples of how to do this effectively?

patentlyze2• 17 days ago

Pro also makes you ask it to use sub-agents instead of just doing it when useful.

Hopefully, 5.6 will automatically spawn sub-agents without needing to ask.

jquery• 17 days ago

Will individual subscribers have access?

AussieWog93• 17 days ago

I would assume yes - their goal is to capture consumer subscribers. Claude are going to take Fable away, and they're going to swoop in and give it to us.

kirubakaran2• 17 days ago

This is why I don't think Fable will be taken away. Not for long anyway.

brcmthrowaway• 17 days ago

Gamechanger..

lawgimenez• 17 days ago

No Twitter, what’s he responding to?

asn04• 17 days ago

https://xcancel.com/haider1/status/2073695124220006575#m

asn04• 17 days ago

Corrected link https://xcancel.com/thsottiaux/status/2073933490513752151

Cider99862• 17 days ago

Check out LibRedirect or Predirect (MV3), it automatically redirects youtube, X, etc links to privacy-respecting frontends.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44344246

107 comments, 1 year ago.

threecheese• 16 days ago

The LibRedirect link in that post is 404

ChrisArchitect• 17 days ago

Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48689028

behnamoh2• 17 days ago

I still don't know why OpenAI doesn't put gpt-5.5-pro in Codex. It's one hell of a model and easily parallels Fable/Mythos. Sure, it'll use up your quota much faster but that's the price some users are willing to pay for absolutely high quality responses.

I think gpt-5.5-pro runs 12x parallel gpt-5.5 agents behind the scene and uses OpenAI's secret sauce to synthesize their answers into one insanely good response.

aetherspawn• 17 days ago

Is it as good as Fable..? Fable is the first model that mostly writes without the AI slop format for me, and so I can comfortably actually copy and paste most of what it spits out.

OpenAI models have always been the worst in my experience for verbose, slop formatted responses, with each generation increasing in sloppiness.

behnamoh2• 17 days ago

Fable is the first model that mostly writes without the AI slop format for me

I'm not that impressed by Fable's writing to be honest, still has the AI giveaways like em dash.

_zoltan_2• 16 days ago

Copy and paste...? In mid-2026? Why on earth would you copy and paste code instead of having the cli tool to the coding end to end?

I haven't opened an IDE in 8 months or so and have no plans to go back.

shusaku• 17 days ago

I recently have been testing ChatGPT business at work and the quota seems to disappear almost instantly even using weaker models. Unless they dramatically increase their quotas it’ll be unusable.

trollbridge• 17 days ago

I don’t know how anyone can realistically use the “business” plans - you blow through your quota so quickly. I use a consumer Pro account ($100 a month) and don’t hit the usage limits nearly as quickly. 5.5 Pro is so slow that it’s not a big deal to paste big prompts into it and come back and check on it an hour later.

sissijwnsjjss2• 17 days ago

My solution for the ones stuck with that: use 5.5 for planning and 5.3-mini for the grunt work. 5.3 is remarkably useful still but you need to hold its hand.

SwellJoe• 17 days ago

API pricing ends up being something like 20x more expensive for GPT 5.5 Pro than GPT 5.5 for actual work, even though the token cost is "only" 6x. On benchmarks where I've run both, I saw $1.12 mean per task with 5.5 and nearly $23 per task with 5.5 Pro, I guess it chews longer and harder on the problem.

If that's at all reflective of what it costs them to run it, I imagine they're in the same boat as Anthropic with Fable; they probably can't afford to offer it at subscription prices given current cost to operate it.

If 5.6 Sol Ultra has efficiency improvements (at one or more layers), and it allows OpenAI to offer a model that's competitive with Fable on the subscription plans, I'll guess a lot of folks will switch.

Fable is notably better than what came before. I watched it figure out stuff on its own over and over, on extremely hard problems, that I previously needed to guide a model to an understanding about, or work with them back and forth for several turns to figure it out together. Like, I've been reverse engineering a hardware device lately, and I've tried to tackle it a few times in the past with both some version of GPT and a couple of versions of Opus (most recently 4.7). In all cases, I barely made progress...would have gotten there eventually, probably, as I'm stubborn, but there were roadblocks constantly, with me and the models getting stumped and going around in circles in the end on every prior attempts.

Fable figured out other ways to find out what's happening, it dug into config files, found and extracted Boost-serialized data, compared that data to the observed behavior, built tools to compare the observed data with our emulated behavior, without being prompted. Would I have gotten there? Eventually, maybe. All prior models didn't; they mostly just tried the things I suggested and stopped at "well, that didn't work" or declared success after seeing results that matched their misunderstanding of the problem. I guess it's possible my prior attempts with other models had "loosened the lid" on the problem; we did already have a long list of documented "this didn't work" and a pile of tools for finding out if something worked. But, even so, I was impressed.

There probably will still be a "OK, let's rewrite this so it's not using lookup tables to precisely simulate the hardware behavior in software, because we don't need the noise, too" stage of the process...but, in one day with Fable, it solved a problem that I'd banged on for at least a week or too in the past with very little real progress. I don't think the models write exceedingly good code, even the best ones, but it sure does figure shit out quick.

agentifysh• 17 days ago

many of us and myself have been using chatgpt pro from codex cli for months now

https://github.com/agentify-sh/desktop

tekacs• 16 days ago

https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.5-pro

GPT-5.5 Pro does not offer a cached input discount.

I think this tells you in one line. It's basically set up for one-shot inference right now, by the looks of things. If you use this in a harness, it would almost immediately fall apart on cost. Not to say that they couldn't make it work, just saying that at least as it's delivered currently, they haven't done so. On the web, there might be doing something to get the equivalent of that behavior internally, such as keeping the session truly alive on GPUs rather than using their external-facing cache-style approach.

gck1• 16 days ago

Forget 5.5-pro. Why isn't everyone talking about the fact that there's no 1M context window model in codex?

Yes, I know attention degrades above ~200k, but it's still useful in many applications.

asn04• 17 days ago

The full conversation https://xcancel.com/haider1/status/2073695124220006575#m

asn04• 17 days ago

Here's the correct link, not sure what happened with that first one https://xcancel.com/thsottiaux/status/2073933490513752151

timcobb• 17 days ago

when will it be available? do we know? I don't have X, not sure if the thread mentions it.

throw394042• 17 days ago

I'm working in large US corporation. And I see that I already have access to 5.6-Sol Ultra on my corporate account.

I haven't really used it yet.

2 months ago management was showing us scoreboards, praising leaders who used most tokens. Last few weeks, we're getting weekly emails, telling us that whenever we can - we should use cheaper models, and that we should watch the page which shows our tokens usage.

VeninVidiaVicii• 17 days ago

I wonder if clues like this will be what are written in history books as the beginning of the bubble bursting.

make33• 17 days ago

I don't think that people relying on the tools too much is the first sign I would identify to mean the bubble is popping

solumunus• 17 days ago

2 months ago management was showing us scoreboards, praising leaders who used most tokens.

Everyone is insane.

camillomiller• 17 days ago

It‘s a collective psychosis. There is not other explanation.

dprkh• 17 days ago

Are corporate employees not allowed to use personal subscriptions?

pkulak• 17 days ago

Generally not, since the corporate account has all the privacy knobs turned up. I use my personal account on my open source projects, where code leaks aren’t exactly an issue.

bulder• 17 days ago

Sounds like a bad idea in general. Any data use agreements get lost, shadow-IT brews and nobody knows what tools to use, oh and it's against the service terms.

bberrry• 17 days ago

If you want your company's code to be used in training, then yes.

ffsm8• 17 days ago

Unless you get written permission you can be sued for publishing their trade secrets. This can end in jail time if your employer is particularly uncaring.

Ymmv, do whatever you want . It's your life.

noduerme7• 17 days ago

That's kinda hilarious. Pretty soon they might just ask people to write code themselves.

imhoguy2• 17 days ago

oh no! what about all these demos which product management vibe coded?

wjnc3• 17 days ago

I’m in Finance and learned pretty quickly that to point out the implicit future cost raises based on the cost the LLM-providers need to recoup was unpopular at best (STFU better describes the situation). Running full force into a bear trap.

re-thc• 17 days ago

Pretty soon they might just ask people to write code themselves.

GPT-10 Human Ultra

senectus1• 17 days ago

interesting, our enterprise account here in Australia doesn't have access to it yet.

Shorel2• 17 days ago

I'm using local models in Ollama for most things and only use the paid corporate account when my local model gets stuck.

ob12er• 16 days ago

for code as well? which local model are u using for coding

whstl5• 17 days ago

The craziest to me was someone saying “we are using AI in daily processes, now we need to automate”.

But of course to some asshole non-technical people it meant asking for their vibe coded bullshit to be merged into production without review and fighting about it.

tmountain2• 17 days ago

The craziest for me is companies that sticking stochastic agents into automated business processes and expecting stable/reliable outcomes. Businesses want deterministic processes in the vast majority of cases.

RazorBucksICO• 16 days ago

“Asshole non-technical people”

You mean the people creating actual business value in every industry where software isn’t the product? Speak not unless spoken to, Mr. cost-center!

abraxas_• 17 days ago

We are using this brand new hammer to build everything!

Please stop using this brand new hammer for glassmaking.

websap• 17 days ago

Dog! Use it and tell us how it is! Stop with this token maxing moaning. You have access to a new powerful tool.

simianwords• 17 days ago

wow almost as if they needed to incentivise people to use and then tame it down to keep it in sustainable levels. shocking!

throwawayHBKFC• 17 days ago

Same here. It's insane that big, conservative tech companies would sign contracts saying "allow our engineers to use however much they want, we'll pay the bill later, no matter what it costs". In any other domain my company would insist on prior permission, and soft usage caps, and hard usage caps, and real-time tracking of actual dollar amounts (not just opaque tokens/credits, not just an after-the-fact view on a dashboard).

The AI companies' salespeople must be the greatest geniuses in the history of the world.

HappMacDonald• 16 days ago

This is the first time in history that I have seen the shovel-sellers convince a supermajority of the gold-miners that "amount of gold mined out of the ground" is less of an indicator of profit than "amount of shovels purchased".

whh• 16 days ago

Apologies for sounding like a billboard, but this is exactly why we built https://flowstate.inc/

bobkb• 16 days ago

The leader boards based on token usage happened in our org for a month. Then we managed to convince the board that what matters is the reliable software shipped. Now we are back to DORA metrics.

softwaredoug• 16 days ago

I’ve switched to a more precise use of agents where I give less autonomy but I have much higher trust the output will be what I expect.

And I do more hand coding to guide the agent to useful patterns I want.

I feel like that’s how I used less capable agents a year ago. But I’m finding even with high quality agents, the slop creeps in.

I want more control. I want to save money. Hence going back to a more 80/20 agent to human LoC split.

JeremyNT• 16 days ago

2 months ago management was showing us scoreboards, praising leaders who used most tokens. Last few weeks, we're getting weekly emails, telling us that whenever we can - we should use cheaper models, and that we should watch the page which shows our tokens usage.

GPT 5.5's double token cost was the threshold for me. These things are getting expensive quickly - the subsidized pricing can't go on forever.

martin_drapeau• 17 days ago

Recently, I've been so eager to get new model releases in Codex. I'm hooked. I hope this accelerates development. Shows how dependant I have become to Codex.

villgax• 17 days ago

All these names mean squat

xcjsam• 17 days ago

Will it have similar limited access like Fable? It is an interesting timeline, as general access for Fable (without using extra credits) is coming to an end :(

imhoguy2• 17 days ago

It is like with drug dealers, you get some free dose, then cheap one, then you pay an arm and a leg.

Somebody has to finaly pay for these heaps of accelerator hardware.

tw1984• 17 days ago

they better get that out fast, it will become totally meaningless when the next GLM gets there first.

more competition is always good for consumers.

internet2000• 17 days ago

Hope this forces Anthropic to be less stingy with Fable.

jascha_eng3• 17 days ago

Not including their best model in a max subscription would otherwise be truly a good reason for once to consider going back to openai for me. I'll at least try it.

sebra• 17 days ago

At least Anthropic have a max subscription for corporate. Codex is only pay-as-you-go pricing beyond the base plan. Hence I'm stuck with Opus for work for the foreseeable future.

satvikpendem15• 17 days ago

It is not because they want to but because they literally don't have the capacity to.

sunaookami• 17 days ago

I thought that was solved after the SpaceX deal? Claude is rarely down since that and they have a 1.5x usage promo until 13th July.

zaptrem• 17 days ago

Why haven’t we seen any queues or the like over the past week then? If it’s truly a capacity limitation why not just boot subscription users to a lower priority queue or limit usage to outside peak hours?

gorszon• 17 days ago

What a suprise, to make better models, they just making them larger and larger, then they can barely run it, after a round of LARP-ing that they invented some dangerous LLM?

nullbio• 16 days ago

Hopefully they aren't, and their business dies. They're not a good company.

llelouch3• 16 days ago

If Altman wasn't such a liar anthropic wouldn't exist.

matheusmoreira2• 16 days ago

Yeah. I'll switch to OpenAI if they release Sol on their subscription tiers.

gigatexal• 17 days ago

I’m all in on Anthropic. How good is frontier openAI models for coding and things?

throwaway274484• 17 days ago

Bruh when did understanding chatbots become like following pokemon? Wtf does any of this this mean. Tf is sol? Tf is ultra? Tf is codex? Tf happened to descriptive nomenclature?

chkmr• 17 days ago

Maybe you jest, but I'll bite.

Tf is sol?

It's a proper noun: the name given to their latest and greatest model. Means "Sun" in Latin. Similar to how Anthropic has been naming its models Fable, Opus, Sonnet etc. Their other models are called Terra (Latin: Earth) and Luna (Latin: Moon) [0].

Tf is ultra?

The name of the "harness" around the model. It'll use deeper thinking, subagents and all that jazz in response to a prompt. Other options include max, high, medium etc I suppose.

Tf is codex?

"Coding agent" similar to Claude Code [1], something with a more descriptive name.

Tf happened to descriptive nomenclature?

Something like GLM-4-32B-0414-128K (not made up [2]) doesn't quite roll off the tongue I suppose.

[0] https://openai.com/index/previewing-gpt-5-6-sol/

[1] https://openai.com/codex/

[2] https://docs.z.ai/guides/llm/glm-4-32b-0414-128k

throwaway274484• 17 days ago

Of course I understand all this, but why the cuteness? Why not just say "<whatever the hell sol is supposed to imply> 2 agent?

Something like GLM-4-32B-0414-128K (not made up [2]) doesn't quite roll off the tongue I suppose.

Surely it would sell better though if they could communicate what they're selling?

Coding agent" similar to Claude Code [1], something with a more descriptive name.

Does this really need branding at all? Surely claude should sell itself if it can work as an agent. And if it is a specific model, what tasks is it trained to do? can we see the fucking training to make this money worth it? Or am I just another sucker buying nikes?

All of this hand waving makes me nauseated. People should buy value, not vibes.

satvikpendem15• 17 days ago

If you follow AI news you'd know what these are easily, or even just look at the top posts in the last month on HN to see.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastMonth&page=2&prefix=fa...

throwaway274484• 17 days ago

This wouldn't be necessary with descriptive product names

protocolture• 16 days ago

And this is a level beyond Sol, I call it Super Sol 2.

patentlyze2• 17 days ago

Nice! It never made sense to me that Pro Extended wasn't in the Codex app.

WhereIsTheTruth• 17 days ago

I can see they have inherited their poor product naming from Microslop

throwaw12• 17 days ago

Has anyone already tried 5.6 Sol in their day to day coding/development activities?

How does it compare to GPT-5.5?

embedding-shape5• 17 days ago

Has it been released yet? I'm not seeing GPT 5.6 anywhere in the selectors, nor any announcement about it, but you're talking about it as it's already been released?

MallocVoidstar2• 17 days ago

There's something like 20 companies with access.

Szpadel2• 17 days ago

there seems to be very big misunderstanding about what the "ultra" is, so let me explain it basing on the codex source code:

it's similar to Claude code ultracode.

there is no ultra effort level implemented on the backend. it's just alias in the codex to max effort setting and single line addition to prompt to use subagents proactively. that's all

as far as we know pro models work differently. for once those are backend implementations and they probably run multiple parallel reasonings for any chunk and use some judgement model to pick best version as persistent one. but that's what I believe is most popular guess, because this is openai secret sauce.

there is still no way to use pro models from codex, or at leat so far there is no trace of it anywhere.

Szpadel2• 17 days ago

sources for easy confirmation:

https://github.com/openai/codex/blob/98d28aab54ed86714901b66...

cactusplant73742• 16 days ago

Very strange because in the TerminalBench benchmark Ultra does better than Sol. They didn’t add the reasoning level to the chart.

smcleod• 17 days ago

ultracode in Claude Code kicks off a dynamic workflow.

Implicated• 17 days ago

It's similar in that it also pins you at xhigh effort _combined_ with the workflows (which one might say isn't far off from proactive use of agents)

d4rkp4ttern3• 16 days ago

single line addition to prompt to use subagents proactively.

This misses an important detail. In Claude Code [1], ultracode suggests the agent create a JavaScript code to deterministically orchestrate sub agents. This is different from just having the main agent launch sub agents and (non-deterministically) manage them.

The resulting workflow is called “dynamic” because CC creates this orchestration script dynamically, “on the fly”.

[1] https://claude.com/blog/introducing-dynamic-workflows-in-cla...

Another useful thing about dynamic workflows is you can ask Claude to make them durable as skills (or slash command) that can be invoked later.

I believe inside Google they have a similar concept called “deterministic workflows”.

I find ultracode extremely useful. Of course you have to watch how your 5 hour and weekly session usage percentages are getting used. So I had Claude make a status-line with 3 progress bars: for context window, 5h session, 7d session:

https://pchalasani.github.io/claude-code-tools/tools/statusl...

Der_Einzige5• 16 days ago

Btw, the /loop “dynamic workflow” is so beyond broken/not working.

It’s sad to see folks like Karpathy make a big deal about looping, than to find that the loop command is broken and it’s crap vibe coded documentation isn’t even accurate on the Claude docs.

This whole dynamic workflow idea is on face bad. It’s all done as a massive cope for the fact that real determinism (I.e using structured outputs to enforce control flow of tools deterministically) is bad for alignment/safety so they can’t let you have access to those tools anymore…

fny• 16 days ago

Can you explain what you find useful about ultracode? I've become wary of agent swarms since the early days and now just prefer to have a single agent spin for hours at time. Parallelism never got me anywhere worthwhile.

cainxinth• 16 days ago

The nomenclature in this industry is all over the place.

cactusplant73742• 16 days ago

That's strange. One can easily steer their session to use agents proactively.

LollipopYakuza• 16 days ago

Many features of the cli tooling of these providers can be achieved by prompting.

The way I see it is that they try to normalize and ease the use of practices established by the community.

cresting• 17 days ago

Which will be the uses cases for this model?

luciana1u• 17 days ago

the naming convention has reached the point where i am pretty sure the next one will just be called "GPT: The Reckoning"

elAhmo2• 17 days ago

Back to terrible naming from Open AI.

jayzer01• 17 days ago

Are people excited about the capabilities of 5.6 over competing LLMs?

shevy-java• 17 days ago

They really try to force everyone into AI.

Next logical step: mandatory age sniffing but it can only be done if you have AI. Those not complying will be denied access to the www.

silversurfer863• 17 days ago

can't wait. been maxing Fable out, if Sol Ultra turns out to be as good and in Codex - that's a paradigm shift

rh94• 16 days ago

I’m really looking forward to see non contaminated benchmarks. In this space its obvious that every day is just another day of a race. Cross fingers we get better opus for lower price

bestony• 16 days ago

Competition is still needed to allow us users to make better use of these good models.

elAhmo2• 16 days ago

This is such a sad state of the industry that a reply to a tweet is now considered like an announcement by the company.

No context, nothing, just a title and a random link to a tweet, which has a seemingly relevant response from someone who works at OpenAI I guess.

matheusmoreira2• 16 days ago

Hope they release Sol on their subscription tiers. That'll make me switch away from Anthropic to OpenAI.

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra will be in Codex

Related Stories