| ▲ | bobjordan 4 hours ago | |
I've spent the past 4+ months building an internal multi-agent orchestrator for coding teams. Agents communicate through a coordination protocol we built, and all inter-agent messages plus runtime metrics are logged to a database. Our default topology is a two-agent pair: one implementer and one reviewer. In practice, that usually means Opus writing code and Codex reviewing it. I just finished a 10-hour run with 5 of these teams in parallel, plus a Codex run manager. Total swarm: 5 Opus 4.7 agents and 6 Codex/GPT-5.4 agents. Opus was launched with: `export CLAUDE_AUTOCOMPACT_PCT_OVERRIDE=35 claude --dangerously-skip-permissions --model 'claude-opus-4-7[1M]' --effort high --thinking-display summarized` Codex was launched with: `codex --dangerously-bypass-approvals-and-sandbox --profile gpt-5-4-high` What surprised me was usage: after 10 hours, both my Claude Code account and my Codex account had consumed 28% of their weekly capacity from that single run. I expected Claude Code usage to be much higher. Instead, on these settings and for this workload, both platforms burned the same share of weekly budget. So from this datapoint alone, I do not see an obvious usage-efficiency advantage in switching from Opus 4.7 to Codex/GPT-5.4. | ||
| ▲ | pitched 4 hours ago | parent [-] | |
I just switched fully into Codex today, off of Claude. The higher usage limits were one factor but I’m also working towards a custom harness that better integrates into the orchestrator. So the Claude TOS was also getting in the way. | ||