Agent-S vs open-codex-computer-use
Agent-S is much bigger: 12.3k stars against 2.0k. Over the days we have tracked them Agent-S moved +3.8% and open-codex-computer-use +88.2%, so open-codex-computer-use is growing faster right now.
They split the axes: Agent-S leads on noise control, open-codex-computer-use on privacy and setup ease.
Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.
Where they stand today
An open-source, research-backed GUI agent framework that combines grounding models and optional local code execution and achieves SOTA (surpassing human performance on OSWorld).
- Stars
- 12.3k
- Tracked growth
- +3.8%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 5d ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Cost to run
- Your API keys (provider-dependent)
Open-source, self-hosted MCP implementation of Computer Use that provides a local alternative to Codex Computer Use and integrates with multiple agent clients.
- Stars
- 2.0k
- Tracked growth
- +88.2%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 1d ago
- Language
- Swift
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Free, local
Six axes, head to head
Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.
| Axis | Agent-S | open-codex-computer-use |
|---|---|---|
Context depth How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository. | ●●●●● Single-screen context | ●●●●● Local UI only |
Noise control How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only. | ●●●●● Basic filters | ●●●●● None mentioned |
Customization How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config. | ●●●●● Configurable params | ●●●●● Config file support |
Privacy Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only. | ●●●●● Cloud APIs (your key) | ●●●●● Fully local |
Model freedom Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one. | ●●●●● Bring-your-own key | ●●●●● Provider-agnostic |
Setup ease What it takes to get a first useful run out of it. | ●●●●● Config + API key | ●●●●● One-command install |
Which one to pick
Pick Agent-S if…
SOTA performance — pick Agent S when you need a research-grade, open-source GUI agent with grounding-model support and optional local code execution.
- Noise control: Basic filters (3/5 against 1/5)
Pick open-codex-computer-use if…
Privacy-first — use a local, open-source Computer Use service that runs on macOS, Linux, and Windows and plugs into Codex/Claude/Gemini clients.
- Privacy: Fully local (5/5 against 3/5)
- Setup ease: One-command install (5/5 against 3/5)
What people want from each one
simular-ai/Agent-S
Hacker News: Show HN: Agent S: an open agentic framework that uses computers drew 2 points and 1 comments.
iFurySt/open-codex-computer-use
Questions people ask
Is Agent-S better than open-codex-computer-use?
They split the axes: Agent-S leads on noise control, open-codex-computer-use on privacy and setup ease. Agent-S is worth picking when sOTA performance — pick Agent S when you need a research-grade, open-source GUI agent with grounding-model support and optional local code execution.
Which of Agent-S and open-codex-computer-use keeps my code private?
Agent-S: Cloud APIs (your key) (3/5). open-codex-computer-use: Fully local (5/5).
What does each one cost to run?
Agent-S: Your API keys (provider-dependent). open-codex-computer-use: Free, local.
Full profiles: simular-ai/Agent-S and iFurySt/open-codex-computer-use. Everything else in Computer use.