AI coding tools compared
| OpenAI Codex | Claude Code | Cursor | GitHub Copilot | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type | Cloud agent | Terminal agent | AI code editor | IDE extension |
| Execution | Cloud sandbox | Local machine | Local (editor) | Local (extension) |
| Starting price | $20/mo (ChatGPT Pro) | $20/mo (Pro) or API | $20/mo (Pro) | $10/mo (Individual) |
| Autonomy level | Very high (background tasks) | Very high (full task execution) | Medium (interactive) | Low to medium (suggestions + agent) |
| Works with | GitHub, browser | Any editor, any terminal | Cursor editor only | VS Code, JetBrains, others |
| Runs locally | No (cloud) | Yes (extension) | ||
| Local file access | ||||
| Extensibility | AGENTS.md | MCP, hooks, agents, skills | Custom rules | Extensions, plugins |
| AI models | OpenAI (o3, o4-mini, GPT-4.1) | Claude (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku) | Multiple providers | OpenAI models |
| Git integration | GitHub native (auto PRs) | Deep (commits, PRs, branches) | Basic (through editor) | Deep (GitHub native) |
| Open source | CLI only |
When to choose Codex
Codex is the best choice when you prioritize safety and isolation. It is ideal for teams that want AI generated code to go through the same review process as human code, delivered as pull requests on GitHub. It also excels when you need to run multiple tasks in parallel without consuming local resources. If you need local file access, fast iteration loops, or deep extensibility, Claude Code is the stronger option.
Combining tools for the best workflow
These tools are not mutually exclusive. Many developers use Codex for larger background tasks (feature implementation, migrations, bulk refactors) while keeping Claude Code or Cursor for interactive, real time coding. Codex handles the heavy lifting in the cloud while your local tool handles quick edits and exploration.