We chose OpenAI because it consistently strikes the best balance between capability, reliability, and developer experience. The models are strong across reasoning, multimodality, and real-world tasks, but what really stands out is how quickly those advances become usable products.
Beyond model quality, the ecosystem matters: stable APIs, clear documentation, and a fast-moving community make it easier to go from prototype to production. Compared to alternatives, OpenAI feels less like a single model and more like a long-term platform we can confidently build on.
OpenAI
Early feedback has been really exciting!! GPT-5.6 is setting a new bar for performance while also reducing token usage and latency, particularly in coding, complex agentic workflows, and tool-heavy tasks.
Kilo Code
two months ago, @sama posted on X:
nailed it 👏👏
Huge improvement. I keep jumping between Claude Code and Codex for development tasks, but I've been stuck using Claude for a few months now. Just a quick test using 5.6 today is making think I should probably switch back to Codex as my main coding AI. It did a very fast and very comprehensive code review this morning and caught a lot of pretty major things that Claude Opus missed when it told me my app was "launch ready".
The “more smarts per token” positioning is interesting. In practice, where have you seen the biggest efficiency gains—long reasoning tasks, coding, or everyday chat?
Programmatic Tool Calling plus explicit prompt caching is the real headline here for anyone running agentic workflows at volume. That's a meaningful cost and latency lever, not just a spec bump. Curious how Sol/Terra/Luna routing works in practice: automatic based on task complexity, or manual per-call?
@andre_ajemian Great follow-on question, considering the way the tiers in the family are typically built out, it is more probable to assume it is going to be manual per-call (Sol / Terra / Luna is chosen by you explicitly in your API call), rather than automatic, because automatic routing based on request complexity adds its own latency factor that defeats the explicit caching, predictable cost selling point. But this is just a hypothesis based on the architecture pattern, it would be good to ask them directly whether automatic routing is planned or not, because in that case the whole cost optimization strategy changes.
How do you deal with possible conflicts that might arise due to concurrent writes of the same shared state when Multi-Agent (beta) executes the task in parallel? Is there any locking or merge functionality, or is it up to the developer to manage that?
Tried it for a quick prototype last week and was surprised how clean the API docs are now. Getting a basic text generation setup running took maybe ten minutes.