Those resets and the removal of the 5-hour usage limit are quietly anchoring me to a much higher usage baseline. I've stopped rationing and just spawn a bunch of agents to work at whatever pace I want, because there always seem to be more resets on the way (at least true for the last week). And now I am actually worried about that if one day they just stop doing so, my "normal" workflow will suddenly exceed the limit, and upgrading will feel like a step backwards.
Can anyone explain how you “win” the market of super intelligence? Particularly with open weights models now rivaling the frontier, it seems like a race to the bottom even if the prices don’t yet reflect that.
"race to the bottom" is the negative framing of "competitive market prices".
So a company or union might say "this is a race to the bottom" when someone new enters their market, but to people buying their services this might be seen as welcome competition.
Do you actually see a negative impact from competition in this area? Or do you just mean competition will further reduce prices?
"race to the bottom" is also a response to a "market for lemons". It's not necessarily a good thing because while pricing drops to the floor so also does value to the customer in general. Usually it happens when price is very visible but the details of what the buyer actually receives are not.
Regulatory capture. You get them to outlaw the part of the competion (safety!) that is unwilling to pricefix and participate in your margin and market division agreements.
Don’t think of this as super intelligence. Think of it as vendor lock-in.
We have a good compare, which is cloud in the early 2000s.
Everyone (at the time) thought cloud compute costs would go to zero.
What most corporations didn’t realize is how entrenched your workflows and processes get when you adopt cloud and you become heavily locked in that ecosystem.
That same ecosystem lock-in is what the frontier labs are hoping for with AI.
You patent and protect (as best you can) the missing ingredients needed to get to AGI. Only half joking and also scary to contemplate. Qualcomm’s CDMA patent is on example. ARM and Texas Instruments two other examples.
Everyone is raising the bottom. Kimi got 60% more expensive during the 2.x cycle despite staying the exact same size.
Now K3 is almost 6x the cost of the original K2 checkpoint, and while the parameter count finally jumped, it's still an extremely sparse MoE and definitely does not cost 6x what the original K2 checkpoint did to host at scale.
Race to the bottom only takes real effect when there's a cap to the capabilities, otherwise everyone races to the bottom of a rising target (how economically valuable the tokens are)
"Why" as in, why take lower margins when Moonshot currently can't service all the demand for the model anyways. Based on past models no one is going to massively undercut Moonshot: few have the chops to serve it as efficiently as Moonshot and of those few, most of them don't go for being the cheapest, they go for being fast + reliable (think Together, Fireworks).
You get what you pay for applies very much with how many axes there are to serving these increasingly large models.
-
And for "with what compute": as the value of a token goes up, what people are willing to pay for compute is going up.
Every once in a while I'll see a story about falling rental rates, but with even slightly more established clouds I've been seeing availability get worse and worse over time.
I'm pretty sure the only reason the highly informal indexes don't reflect this is because every neocloud trying to cash in on an NVIDIA Inception discount kicks off by selling unrealistically cheap compute for a bit.
AGI will be insanely priced. LLMs are retarded childrin compared to proper intelligence. So this is just the entry level intelligence like thing. But I doubt there will be an AGI accessible by anyone.
If AGI comes to exist it won't be "priced" at all, since the lab that creates it will either quickly be seized by the gov't for national security, or they will become the most powerful organization in the world and have no need to sell services to other corporations. they will become the only corporation.
Good sci fi premise, but not at all how AGI will happen.
It’s not going to be a singularity at one moment of time. It’s not going to be instant runaway self-improvement, no matter what doomers and fetishists say.
It’s going to be gradual. We’ll see glimmers of AGI, and the “G” part will be about gradual broadening of domains and deepening of capabilities.
All of the coding harnesses are already using their own tools to self-improve, and the HITL component is getting less frequent and at higher levels of abstraction.
That’s how AGI gets here: very gradually, no hard takeoff, and nobody will be able to pinpoint when exactly it happened.
So: also no single lab with a massive advantage, no government takeovers. It’ll be a lot less dramatic than the extremes believe. IMO, of course.
The problem is... the moment someone gets it and it really solves hard problems and solves scifi level shenanigans, the given country that owns it, could gain such unfathomable lead above anyone else that it will almost surely lead to an all out war. I don't even know whether it is possible to conceal that you have such capability....
Imagine all the fear- and warmongering kingmakers and powerful individuals when they realize they have no power over anything or anyone.....so game over for them. They won't like it at all, at all.
Another problem, that in order to make it understand real life, it needs robots or humans wired into it (brain interfaces) in order to test certain things in the real world. And that is another level we know almost nothing about, at least on the surface.
Someone could have a small private breakthrough tomorrow that gives sample learning efficiency of the brain, online learning, and consolidated memories.
This is actually what I've started to feel a vague nagging concern about as well..
Say what you will, there's no way I'm going back to non-AI assisted coding. Even though I don't use AI to generate code or assets, it's great for reviews and brainstorming etc.
What if OpenAI/Anthropic decide to do a Netflix/Spotify move and pull the rug out from under us one day?
Like skyrocketing the price, or limiting peasants to older models (because Glorious Leader said so), or maybe some leak comes out that they've been spying on us all along.
This feels a lot like free spins in slot machines. I have a friend obsessed with using up all the Fable usage which supposedly ends today. He's doing a lot of stuff of questionable usefulness just because it's a resource perceived as scarce.
Yeah, it's the gacha of software development. I too redline my subscription every single week just because I want to get the most value out of the money I spent. Literally 100% weekly usage, every single week.
I am using the resulting software and documents though. I'm daily driving the projects I wrote with AI. Started new ones for fun, such as decompilation projects for my cherished childhood games. Hardened my router and my LAN. I just keep finding an unending amount of things to do.
It took over a month to complete a full Fable code review of my lone lisp project.
That's what half of people's AI developed projects feels like to me. I have colleagues using Openclaw, and having an entire team of agents managing their home infrastructure. And I'm just thinking "why?". They're not developing anything that useful, their homes are already automated via home assistant. It's just agents for agents sake. Outside of my work life, I find very little need to be using AI.
AI in general is a slot machine and it wouldn't surprise me if that was a large part of the psychosis. You prompt the lever, watch the display spin, and sometimes, just sometimes, a bunch of coins come out.
There's no psychosis in noting that something consistently produces good work, or in wanting to get the most out what is effectively an employee - hired for the price of the subscription. Seriously, if that's 'psychosis', then every employer on the planet eager to wring out productivity from their employees is afflicted with the same psychosis.
Isn't it rather a psychosis to insist that people are imagining the results they see, just because you don't like the tech and can't stomach the thought there might be something in it?
"Beginning July 20, Claude Fable 5 will be included in all Max and Team Premium plans, at 50% of limits.
Pro and Team Standard users will continue to have access to Fable via usage credits, and will receive a one-time $100 credit.
Demand for Fable has been challenging to predict, which is why we rolled it out to subscription plans in stages, extending access several times as we secured additional capacity." [0]
I am assuming he means that Fable will remain part of the subscription plans going forward, but only for Max and Team Premium plans. For other plans it will be available via credits only.
I'm kind of impressed how often they manage to do this. Claude Code and Grok Build do resets too, but nowhere near this often. And in an ironic twist for a big company with the infrastructure, Google Antigravity never seems to do resets like this at all (at least that I've noticed). I wonder how much this stuff costs OpenAI to do?
They can do it often because they have compute, and they have compute mostly because they are pretty far behind Anthropic when it comes to heavy enterprise users. They’ve supposedly added several million since 5.6 launch, which is a steep growth curve. We will see if those users stick around. Anecdotally, I’ve stopped using it for anything major because it has attempted to do some very unsafe things when I wasn’t looking. Friends I’ve talked to have also gotten over the initial honeymoon period.
They (OpenAI) also made many more deals to acquire compute before they actually had the revenue to support it. They paraded around the world making deals with everyone and anyone. By doing it earlier, they got way better unit prices. Anthropic bought their compute at significantly higher prices by waiting until they actually had demand to fulfill.
I’m not sure if resets require that much compute, maybe a few whales will use the service a bit more right after a reset. What matters more is the money, as they’re giving away free usage, and subsidising subscription users even more.
It’s a false idea that a reset “gives you more”. You don’t get any more tokens post reset than before. If you were consuming faster than your allowance before the reset then you probably end up with some free usage, but most people are not likely so far over their pro-rata limit that it’s a huge cost for OpenAI.
What it does incentivise is pushing more usage in case there’s a reset-generating additional demand. Probably sounds good in the boardroom that token consumption is up X% this quarter.
Unlikely to last forever, but for now the goal is to beat Anthropic. Up until the Mythos/Fable debacle, I’d have said Anthropic were leading, but if you’ll forgive the pun, I think they flew to close to the sun, and when Sol came out, they’d shot their “Mythos/Fable” shot and it turned out to be… good, but not revolutionary.
Numbers are for Codex AND ChatGPT Work users. So if a ChatGPT subscriber tries Work tab they must be counted as a new active user. So it’s not like 1M new developers daily.
Which seems a bit off to me. Can they even ipo right now due to the apple business?
Although I don't think you're wrong. The number of "organic" social media posts I've seen in the past few weeks of the form: 'Wow, Anthropic users are ugly losers...nothing like those handsome openai tiger blood winner sages' is simply too high in my mind for anything other than an ipo prelude.
[Also are altman and musk really fighting on x? Like, that's got to be a sign of some sort of internal stressors right?]
They, like every startup ever, count users in a very stupid way.
One person using the app on two computers and a phone? That's obviously 3 users.
Growth Hackers and SEO types have done so much to make the world an insufferable place. I congradulate them on the OpenClaw psyop, that was some very inspired bullshit that did fuck all and is now irrelevant.
Such a counting method doesn’t explain that incredible growth. Do you think day by day huge portions of users are using additional devices in perpetuity?
I know it for a fact. Have you never worked at a startup before or even seen "growth hacking" at work?
Turning <100k claude refugees into seven figures by counting their web sessions, their codex sessions, and the mobile app as separate "users" is pratically the only way you can get such numbers.
Then you do it again by offering ex-users like me who have already given them a grand or two a free month of plus or pro (this is the third time they have done so for me)
When you hear founders and investors talk about "the magic of storytelling" "the power of momentum", this is what that is.
I would expect them to grow faster than 1 million users a day in that case, since chatGPT has almost a billion users. Maybe everyone's just using the web app or mobile?
My /usage is telling me '+50% weekly limits promo through Aug 19' - that's huge, and better than what I'm getting with the equivalent Codex plan I have right now. Though what Codex does have over Claude is Sol /fast - that hands down is the best coding experience right now.
FWIW, this was announced before the day where the +50% limit promotion from May was supposed to end, so effectively continuing the promotion. This will mean that you retain the same usage instead of seeing it drop.
I guess if they'd reduce the usage in their current stage they'll only lose customers - this is not a perk, it's damage control.
Crazy value for money now with the banked resets. At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible. On my codex pro plan, I am 5.6 sol'ing my way everyday with the odd ultra mode. Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
API pricing itself might have extreme margins compared to the real cost. Anyway, in my testing the Pro 20x $200 plan gives you about $2200 API-equivalent weekly usage if you're only using GPT 5.6 Sol, so quite close to $9k-$10k/month API-equivalent, it's a bit inconsistent with cache costs.
It's very interesting that for Anthropic the $100 and $200 plans only differ 2x in weekly limits, the 5 hour limit differences are more severe. But for OpenAI, Pro 20x is, well, 4x of Pro 5x for only 2x cost. So, for example, 100% of weekly usage for Codex on a Plus ($20) account is just 5% of weekly usage for Codex on Pro 20x.
And you can calculate how much extra usage you can get from resets, and especially banked resets by purposefully using the whole quota and using your banked reset - they expire 30 days after they're given out, so if you don't use one, it just disappears.
The $200 plan is explicitly 4x the $100 plan[1] only for "per session". That's so vague. I initially pushed back against your claim, but reading now Anthropic is not at all clear, in fact.
Empirically it is quite easy to validate that the "20x" plan is misleading and only give you twice the weekly limits of the "5x" plan, and many people on r/ClaudeAI, etc can verify that.
Anthropic is also the one often playing games with:
* The "+30% tokens" tokeniser, alongside also gating token counting behind an API (versus the MIT tiktoken for OpenAI), so who knows if it's really a new tokeniser or of it's just a disguised price increase.
* Prompt injections appended to API (not just Claude.ai or Claude Code!), such as <ethics_reminders>, or LCRs (long conversation reminders), which you never asked but still pay for with expensive API. You can detect this because your input_tokens, as reported by the Messages response, sometimes don't match, and are higher than your actual input.
(Alternatively, for testing purposes, create a tool like `telemetry_log_anthropic_reminder` or something and instruct your system prompt to require Claude to call the tool anytime it detects any Anthropic/Claude reminder masquerading in the user input -- mostly reliable; but misses some reminders).
In particular, the long conversational reminders, when incorrectly triggered by a classifier and (almost silently, unless you track tokens) appended to an API / agentic coding session, can ruin your agent's performance; and it often fires repeatedly once the classifier kicks in.
If you're using Anthropic API, you need to set up metrics/logging for how often they are appending things to your prompt without your knowledge.
So far I have not empirically observed prompt injection by the OpenAI API, only Anthropic APIs.
How do you spend so much? Our company also has Claude enterprise pricing. I have a monthly limit of $800, I use Opus for everything, and I'm around the limit after the month. Genuinely can't imagine spending 12 times as many tokens without intentionally trying to waste money.
I am not trying to tokenmaxx, but I will work on 2-3 tickets simultaneously in seperate terminals (worktrees). Also having Claude triage and check logs etc. - plus the odd bit of project planning in Claude desktop/cowork. We also have a triage agent skill for the work I’m doing which fans out. All in all deadlines looming so it’s been a case of pump out the work and prove the product. I suppose if you’re in more a BAU state this kind of usage is overkill.
> Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
I think it’s funny that everyone anchors to the API pricing as the real cost.
Most likely is that their API costs are printing profits. They can sell the subscription plans at a slight loss because it gets more people like you hooked on GPT models at home and suggesting them at work, where the real money is made.
I think their subscription plans go mostly unused when averaged across all subscribers, too. Some customers are getting great deals by maxing out 100% every week, but most probably use much less.
The reset game is an addictive challenge that gets the hardcore users more hooked on their products because you feel pressured to use it as much as you can before the next unpredictable surprise reset lands.
Idk, Kimi K3 is not that much cheaper than Opus and it’s probably a smaller model. We’ll know for certain when commodity providers price it, but I expect it to be the same price.
It really depends on caching[1] and active parameters, and some dark arts really only possible at Hyperscalers they also have better access to 288GB VRAM B300s[2] that really makes a difference in cache space.
K3 may be bit smaller/ similar in total parameter count than Opus, but Opus (and GPT) definitely has become a lot more efficient in the last 6 months or so, hence more or less forced upgrades. I expect the active parameter count and cache performance is quite different.
--
Opus is still almost twice as expensive (if tokens were equal) at $5/$15 compared to K3 at $3/$15. Tokens are not equal though, Anthropic's tokenizer is much less dense than other frontier lab's so the actual price difference is like 3x.
Kimi uses more reasoning tokens and is generally more inefficient with its usage, that doesn't impact token cost economics for the provider though . It does for us as buyers thus the need to evaluating by Cost per task rather than unit pricing.
On pure tokens/$ - there is definitely room for a price war if operators start going by pure unit costs. Both probably want(ed) to have good enough numbers in preparing for the IPO.
---
[1] the pricing kind of reflect this already - 10x diff for uncached input.
[2] Moonshot does not have access latest gen GPUs so their unit economics is likely hampered a bit for high parameter models.
Kicking myself that I didn't use one of my 4 resets which just expired, but then again, they reset our usage anyway. We are just blasting away with 5.6-Sol-ultra, doing a project I wouldn't have otherwise done (basically drastically editing someone's novel for them and adding illustrations).
Yes I honestly think if we pull it off the revenue would easily pay off. Otherwise an expensive experiment, but with fewer staff so the damage is less than it used to be and a verdict much faster.
That’s less than the fully loaded cost of hiring another engineer.
If someone is making the case that it’s helping the team get twice as much work done without hiring more people (which I’m neither agreeing with or disagreeing with) then the bean counters would actually prefer it. Hiring people is messy and expensive. Spending on API costs is a dial that you can turn down later if you need to, without laying anyone off and paying severance.
> At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible.
A very happy gambler of tokens at the Anthropic casino, running up costs on the house at no cost to them, but to $COMPANY paying.
I really wish there was a canonical platform endpoint to programmatically check Codex usage amount and the quota reset times so I could just vibecode an app to alert "hey, your usage just went to 100% so that means OpenAI did a reset" and "hey, your 5-hour usage is at 10%, wrap up what you're doing".
The only way to do it now is through shenanigans with the Codex App Server which is not ideal.
Just ask Codex to use its local auth token as a bearer token and send a GET request to it. The response includes "available_count" and "credits[].expires_at". Or script it yourself obviously.
The 5h limit is gone (for now). It does not presently need to be chased. :)
For the automated checking of other stuff: It was a one-shot prompt to get Codex clank up some Python that returns remaining usage, next reset time/date, and so on.
The result does use Codex App Server, but it's a short-lived process that is dealt with over stdio so that's... fine-ish, I guess?
The API endpoints on this page accept an OAuth token from ~/.codex/auth.json. You can simply ask Codex to create a report skill with some curl examples.
Orrrr... He could just as well click the link he has bookmarked already, and see it with his own eyes, without the token use to report on his token use.
Anthropic has been like this for a while, although in their latest announcement, the $20 tier won't have the "cheap" access to Fable, and neither will the $100 tier.
There were a few tweets about it so they weren't super quiet about it. I think you can get it back by setting `model_context_window=YOUR_VALUE` in ~/.codex/config.toml though.
I'm starting to think It might be a good idea to stay with American models, by virtue of them feeling so threatened they give out more and more free perks.
> I'm starting to think It might be a good idea to stay with American models, by virtue of them feeling so threatened they give out more and more free perks.
If you keep staying with them, they'd feel less and less threatened.
You need to use them about half as much as you do a Chinese model so that the usage stats that get collected show them that they are still losing users (and attention) to the Chinese models.
I've had this too on my personal pro plan and also when I run the usage command it says it's resetting tomorrow rather than getting cut off.
I'm trying to squeeze what I can in the meantime but I feel like they said it was getting cut off multiple times and they keep extending and possibly resetting it (havent been looking close enough to know for sure)
hese resets are a trap. They're artificially anchoring our workflows to a massive baseline, trapping us for the inevitable 5x price hike when the market finally consolidates.
Originally yes, everyone's usage limit went back to 100% at the same time regardless of if you were at 0% or 99%. Now they tend to give out "banked" resets where users can choose when to use it for up to a month (except the most recent one, which I think was non-banked)
Are they more expensive? I think it's a clever tactic that avoids sudden increased workload, because users may "save" their resets when they need some additional work done.
Yup! Big beautiful burning pile of cash. Though there’s some nuance with subsidizing inference (which is supposed to make them money long term) vs training (which we’re supposed to ignore I guess).
And they can’t stop because they want to IPO soon, and stopping this madness would signal loudly that they are bleeding cash, don’t really have a business model, and might not be worth $2 trillion after all.
I didn't knew about these resets up until a few days back... and every time they used to reset these limits, I thought I was going crazy... the usage numbers just didn't match. And the weekly end window just kept pushing ahead by a day or a few... just the right amount of deviation to make you believe you are going crazy.
Are Codex users even a drop in the bucket of overall use? I mean, it's a pretty specific way to interact with the bot.
Codex usage is clearly common enough to have entered the vernacular of folks here on HN.
But we aren't everyone, and it seems likely to me that there's a lot more people in the world burning tokens using ChatGPT than there are who even know what Codex is.
It is safe to assume there are more 'normal' chat sessions than 'codex' sessions, although Codex sessions likely consume 10x the tokens the average person does asking for a lasagna recipe.
If I would have my tin foil hat on I'd say they can manipulate how the subscription usage gets calculate during the week, so that these resets don't cost them much or anything. Sometimes it feels like the usage just disappears with nothing to show for it.
> OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets.
We don’t know that. If they have already paid for the hardware and it is not running 100%, and customers would not pay to get reset, they don’t really lose money.
I personally believe that they are buying time until they can make current gov. to bring-in a legislation that targets Chinese models one way or the other.
And now Kimi-K3 has caused a new Deepseek moment.. but this time, the only horizon that was still untouched: frontier performance.
I think it's mostly to spread hype for the new models. Sol can be ridiculously long running, even without /goal so it can run for 12hr+ on a problem with defined and verifiable output. So it's a good way for people to get hyped about the capabilities without worrying about usage limits.
It's a pretty smart move. If they weren't doing this, I would have simply switched back to DeepSeek, Mimo, GLM, etc. (and maybe K3) whenever I hit my usage limits, as was my normal custom.
Not to veer to far off topic, but do any of you long-term Codex users happen to know how long the Codex Resets can be banked for? I can find no indications of an expiration date in the TUI or on the Web App. From what I have searched, I have been getting somewhat mixed answers.
Anyway, I do appreciate how OpenAI seems to be far more generous with these resets than other providers. I've never come close to needing a reset yet. I have some tasks that I have been procrastinating, so my need for my resets might come in handy in the near future.
I stopped paying for Codex because of this shit. "Whoops we burned a week of 20x usage in minutes because we fucked up the cache again. You can keep paying money to get more resets to fix it"
nah, I'll use open models. Only way I'd use codex now is if it was free, and I don't mean someone else paying for it. I would rather have them pay for DSv4P or Kimi
Check the github issues brother, search for "usage". Read through the noise. Look at the dates. Don't forget the closed ones.
It's been happening every week since 5.2 was fresh. Not everyone is effected every time. Sometimes it's regional, other times it's per platform, or per version, with a feature (new or old) either enabled or disabled, or some combination of these things. Sometimes you get resets that nobody else does, other times you don't get the ones that were announced. Sometimes you get emails telling you that boosts on limits you didn't even know you had are expiring. At points it did balance out when they really fucked up metering and were underbilling by absurd factors, but that feels more like being toyed with and experimented on than a genuine mistake.
That someone had the 'brilliant' idea to add banked resets (which do expire, so you have to use or lose them, hope you didn't have other plans) says to me that they are no longer as confident about actually being able to fix this as they once were. I'm sure some amount of it is a function of compute availability and reliability, but the rest are definitely issues with the app and it's a rake they keep stomping on.
Compared to just about any other dev centric service I have paid at least $200/mo for, this does not feel very professional to me. They got $1200 outta me and it never really improved. At points I felt like I was getting my moneys worth, and I did burn through a few hundred million tokens, but the frustration of having your projects and plans interrupted and having to wait is not awesome... and then I used Deepseek V4 Pro and felt sick to my stomach with buyers remorse as I watched what it did with just $10.
Sure, but also who asked? And that's because they have the compute to burn, which is conditional based on their need to use it to train the next one.
Anything else I've ever paid $200/mo for, advertised as being for professionals, had a markedly better customer experience. If you wanna be Patrick and tell your pet rock to take its time at that price, well then you're Patrick. Good job!
I'm having far more fun with Kimi and Deepseek, at lower prices, without these problems. And I don't have to follow a bunch of obnoxious shitposters to stay clued in on what the fuck is going on or what this week's excuse is.
They're especially cocky right now, they have to beat their chest and pretend like their only competition is Anthropic. They're in for a rough wake up call man. Playing it fast and loose with developer loyalty is a fantastic way to get burned when options like those exist. They are earnestly just as good and in some cases better, and check this out: nobody can take them away from you no matter where you live. If you want to rent 8 GPUs and run the open models yourself, you can do that! You can even be enterprising and sell your excess compute to your friends, or strangers. Best to figure this out before the regulatory capture starts
there's now a live status page tracking when a trillion-dollar company decides to hand out free compute, and refreshing it at 2am feels like a completely reasonable thing to do
there is now a dedicated dashboard tracking when a tech company resets its own rate limits and it is somehow more reliable than the actual product status page
Those resets and the removal of the 5-hour usage limit are quietly anchoring me to a much higher usage baseline. I've stopped rationing and just spawn a bunch of agents to work at whatever pace I want, because there always seem to be more resets on the way (at least true for the last week). And now I am actually worried about that if one day they just stop doing so, my "normal" workflow will suddenly exceed the limit, and upgrading will feel like a step backwards.
All these resets are given because of rival competition. When they win the market, we are going to be squeezed $$$.
Can anyone explain how you “win” the market of super intelligence? Particularly with open weights models now rivaling the frontier, it seems like a race to the bottom even if the prices don’t yet reflect that.
"race to the bottom" is the negative framing of "competitive market prices".
So a company or union might say "this is a race to the bottom" when someone new enters their market, but to people buying their services this might be seen as welcome competition.
Do you actually see a negative impact from competition in this area? Or do you just mean competition will further reduce prices?
"race to the bottom" is also a response to a "market for lemons". It's not necessarily a good thing because while pricing drops to the floor so also does value to the customer in general. Usually it happens when price is very visible but the details of what the buyer actually receives are not.
You can only outlaw stuff in your own countrys..
And if cheaper access is an advantage, other countries will surpass you
Regulatory capture. You get them to outlaw the part of the competion (safety!) that is unwilling to pricefix and participate in your margin and market division agreements.
Don’t think of this as super intelligence. Think of it as vendor lock-in.
We have a good compare, which is cloud in the early 2000s.
Everyone (at the time) thought cloud compute costs would go to zero.
What most corporations didn’t realize is how entrenched your workflows and processes get when you adopt cloud and you become heavily locked in that ecosystem.
That same ecosystem lock-in is what the frontier labs are hoping for with AI.
Competitors run out of money and shut down, perhaps. Although I don't see how that happens for anyone but Google.
Do we all shift over to Chinese models.
Yes.
You patent and protect (as best you can) the missing ingredients needed to get to AGI. Only half joking and also scary to contemplate. Qualcomm’s CDMA patent is on example. ARM and Texas Instruments two other examples.
It's unlikely that a clear single winner will emerge in this competitive market.
You hit the nail on the head. It's a race to the bottom.
Everyone is raising the bottom. Kimi got 60% more expensive during the 2.x cycle despite staying the exact same size.
Now K3 is almost 6x the cost of the original K2 checkpoint, and while the parameter count finally jumped, it's still an extremely sparse MoE and definitely does not cost 6x what the original K2 checkpoint did to host at scale.
Race to the bottom only takes real effect when there's a cap to the capabilities, otherwise everyone races to the bottom of a rising target (how economically valuable the tokens are)
But Kimi (at least say) will release their weights. So surely, if their prices are too high, somebody else will host it cheaper?
a) Why and b) With what compute?
"Why" as in, why take lower margins when Moonshot currently can't service all the demand for the model anyways. Based on past models no one is going to massively undercut Moonshot: few have the chops to serve it as efficiently as Moonshot and of those few, most of them don't go for being the cheapest, they go for being fast + reliable (think Together, Fireworks).
You get what you pay for applies very much with how many axes there are to serving these increasingly large models.
-
And for "with what compute": as the value of a token goes up, what people are willing to pay for compute is going up.
Every once in a while I'll see a story about falling rental rates, but with even slightly more established clouds I've been seeing availability get worse and worse over time.
I'm pretty sure the only reason the highly informal indexes don't reflect this is because every neocloud trying to cash in on an NVIDIA Inception discount kicks off by selling unrealistically cheap compute for a bit.
Whats the bottom here tho? Its obvious what winning is.
only way you could win the market would be to own all the gpus
AGI will be insanely priced. LLMs are retarded childrin compared to proper intelligence. So this is just the entry level intelligence like thing. But I doubt there will be an AGI accessible by anyone.
If AGI comes to exist it won't be "priced" at all, since the lab that creates it will either quickly be seized by the gov't for national security, or they will become the most powerful organization in the world and have no need to sell services to other corporations. they will become the only corporation.
Good sci fi premise, but not at all how AGI will happen.
It’s not going to be a singularity at one moment of time. It’s not going to be instant runaway self-improvement, no matter what doomers and fetishists say.
It’s going to be gradual. We’ll see glimmers of AGI, and the “G” part will be about gradual broadening of domains and deepening of capabilities.
All of the coding harnesses are already using their own tools to self-improve, and the HITL component is getting less frequent and at higher levels of abstraction.
That’s how AGI gets here: very gradually, no hard takeoff, and nobody will be able to pinpoint when exactly it happened.
So: also no single lab with a massive advantage, no government takeovers. It’ll be a lot less dramatic than the extremes believe. IMO, of course.
So, extend what they said to cover a 50 year timespan? "Instantaneous" wasn't mentioned or implied.
The problem is... the moment someone gets it and it really solves hard problems and solves scifi level shenanigans, the given country that owns it, could gain such unfathomable lead above anyone else that it will almost surely lead to an all out war. I don't even know whether it is possible to conceal that you have such capability....
Imagine all the fear- and warmongering kingmakers and powerful individuals when they realize they have no power over anything or anyone.....so game over for them. They won't like it at all, at all.
Another problem, that in order to make it understand real life, it needs robots or humans wired into it (brain interfaces) in order to test certain things in the real world. And that is another level we know almost nothing about, at least on the surface.
PS: do these self improving harnesses even work?
Someone could have a small private breakthrough tomorrow that gives sample learning efficiency of the brain, online learning, and consolidated memories.
LLMs may be retarded but at least they know how to write "children"
Perhaps.
But that hasn't happened, and it may or may not ever happen; we don't know the future. All we know is the past and the present.
And that today, we have tokens to burn.
If they try to engage in monopolistic pricing, I'll simply start paying for GLM-5.2, K3, DeepSeek et al.
I cannot recommend enough OpenCode Go, which for 10 bucks a month lets you use all of them with pretty hefty limits. Use it while it lasts
$5 with a referral code for the first month.
You get $60 worth of usage. It’s too good to be true, yet it is.
This is actually what I've started to feel a vague nagging concern about as well..
Say what you will, there's no way I'm going back to non-AI assisted coding. Even though I don't use AI to generate code or assets, it's great for reviews and brainstorming etc.
What if OpenAI/Anthropic decide to do a Netflix/Spotify move and pull the rug out from under us one day?
Like skyrocketing the price, or limiting peasants to older models (because Glorious Leader said so), or maybe some leak comes out that they've been spying on us all along.
It's a competitive market. Kimi K3 has almost reached parity with Opus.
Quietly eh?
This feels a lot like free spins in slot machines. I have a friend obsessed with using up all the Fable usage which supposedly ends today. He's doing a lot of stuff of questionable usefulness just because it's a resource perceived as scarce.
Yeah, it's the gacha of software development. I too redline my subscription every single week just because I want to get the most value out of the money I spent. Literally 100% weekly usage, every single week.
I am using the resulting software and documents though. I'm daily driving the projects I wrote with AI. Started new ones for fun, such as decompilation projects for my cherished childhood games. Hardened my router and my LAN. I just keep finding an unending amount of things to do.
It took over a month to complete a full Fable code review of my lone lisp project.
That's what half of people's AI developed projects feels like to me. I have colleagues using Openclaw, and having an entire team of agents managing their home infrastructure. And I'm just thinking "why?". They're not developing anything that useful, their homes are already automated via home assistant. It's just agents for agents sake. Outside of my work life, I find very little need to be using AI.
Remember when people used to play Pokemon Go?
AI in general is a slot machine and it wouldn't surprise me if that was a large part of the psychosis. You prompt the lever, watch the display spin, and sometimes, just sometimes, a bunch of coins come out.
There's no psychosis in noting that something consistently produces good work, or in wanting to get the most out what is effectively an employee - hired for the price of the subscription. Seriously, if that's 'psychosis', then every employer on the planet eager to wring out productivity from their employees is afflicted with the same psychosis.
Isn't it rather a psychosis to insist that people are imagining the results they see, just because you don't like the tech and can't stomach the thought there might be something in it?
We’re at the gamification stage of motivating people to use your product, eh?
Permafable got announced earlier this week, but definitely the slot machine feel is real.
What do you mean by Permafable?
"Beginning July 20, Claude Fable 5 will be included in all Max and Team Premium plans, at 50% of limits.
Pro and Team Standard users will continue to have access to Fable via usage credits, and will receive a one-time $100 credit.
Demand for Fable has been challenging to predict, which is why we rolled it out to subscription plans in stages, extending access several times as we secured additional capacity." [0]
[0] https://x.com/claudeai/status/2078302415804379218
I am assuming he means that Fable will remain part of the subscription plans going forward, but only for Max and Team Premium plans. For other plans it will be available via credits only.
Why does Fable usage end today?!
Anthropic won't have anything competitive with OpenAI Sol and Kimi K3?
I'm kind of impressed how often they manage to do this. Claude Code and Grok Build do resets too, but nowhere near this often. And in an ironic twist for a big company with the infrastructure, Google Antigravity never seems to do resets like this at all (at least that I've noticed). I wonder how much this stuff costs OpenAI to do?
Some of these resets were because of bugs in the 5.6 launch that caused subagent-users to burn _a lot_ of extra tokens. It was placating customers.
It is impressive they've got the capacity to do so.
They can do it often because they have compute, and they have compute mostly because they are pretty far behind Anthropic when it comes to heavy enterprise users. They’ve supposedly added several million since 5.6 launch, which is a steep growth curve. We will see if those users stick around. Anecdotally, I’ve stopped using it for anything major because it has attempted to do some very unsafe things when I wasn’t looking. Friends I’ve talked to have also gotten over the initial honeymoon period.
They (OpenAI) also made many more deals to acquire compute before they actually had the revenue to support it. They paraded around the world making deals with everyone and anyone. By doing it earlier, they got way better unit prices. Anthropic bought their compute at significantly higher prices by waiting until they actually had demand to fulfill.
I’m not sure if resets require that much compute, maybe a few whales will use the service a bit more right after a reset. What matters more is the money, as they’re giving away free usage, and subsidising subscription users even more.
It’s a false idea that a reset “gives you more”. You don’t get any more tokens post reset than before. If you were consuming faster than your allowance before the reset then you probably end up with some free usage, but most people are not likely so far over their pro-rata limit that it’s a huge cost for OpenAI.
What it does incentivise is pushing more usage in case there’s a reset-generating additional demand. Probably sounds good in the boardroom that token consumption is up X% this quarter.
Unlikely to last forever, but for now the goal is to beat Anthropic. Up until the Mythos/Fable debacle, I’d have said Anthropic were leading, but if you’ll forgive the pun, I think they flew to close to the sun, and when Sol came out, they’d shot their “Mythos/Fable” shot and it turned out to be… good, but not revolutionary.
I think GPT 6 will be OpenAI's response to Fable/Mythos. There are (baseless) rumours that it will be coming fairly soon.
I think Sol is pretty much there already
> 5 days ago: 7M users
> 4 days ago: 8M users
> 3 days ago: 9M users
That's some incredible growth.
tbf they turned previous ChatGPT macOS app into Codex, so getting a "new" Codex user might mean someone using ChatGPT just updated their app.
I don’t even know what Codex is anymore and at this point I’m too afraid to ask. I remember the days when it was a VSCode extension.
Didn’t they also name their new hardware product Codex?
Yes, they’re following the Microsoft strategy of “if you name everything Copilot, you can report high Copilot usage”
To me, it's the cli.
Numbers are for Codex AND ChatGPT Work users. So if a ChatGPT subscriber tries Work tab they must be counted as a new active user. So it’s not like 1M new developers daily.
I have an inkling of a feeling that this generosity is a stunt only to help juice the growth and “story” specifically for the IPO…
Best use the AI subsidies while you can!
Which seems a bit off to me. Can they even ipo right now due to the apple business?
Although I don't think you're wrong. The number of "organic" social media posts I've seen in the past few weeks of the form: 'Wow, Anthropic users are ugly losers...nothing like those handsome openai tiger blood winner sages' is simply too high in my mind for anything other than an ipo prelude.
[Also are altman and musk really fighting on x? Like, that's got to be a sign of some sort of internal stressors right?]
I was thinking about this. How do they measure this? Every upgrade of the ChatGPT apps get counted?
They, like every startup ever, count users in a very stupid way.
One person using the app on two computers and a phone? That's obviously 3 users.
Growth Hackers and SEO types have done so much to make the world an insufferable place. I congradulate them on the OpenClaw psyop, that was some very inspired bullshit that did fuck all and is now irrelevant.
Such a counting method doesn’t explain that incredible growth. Do you think day by day huge portions of users are using additional devices in perpetuity?
I know it for a fact. Have you never worked at a startup before or even seen "growth hacking" at work?
Turning <100k claude refugees into seven figures by counting their web sessions, their codex sessions, and the mobile app as separate "users" is pratically the only way you can get such numbers.
Then you do it again by offering ex-users like me who have already given them a grand or two a free month of plus or pro (this is the third time they have done so for me)
When you hear founders and investors talk about "the magic of storytelling" "the power of momentum", this is what that is.
They just merged the ChatGPT app and the Codex app into one super app.
It is a clever growth hack.
I would expect them to grow faster than 1 million users a day in that case, since chatGPT has almost a billion users. Maybe everyone's just using the web app or mobile?
I was using the web app. Don't see any reason to use anything else for basic chat. Not having access to my computer is a feature
As someone who just used computer use to successfully perform a "change of address" across 52 different services, hard disagree. It's magic.
It’s like two parents fighting over their children with who can give them the most gifts. I’m loving it, two Christmases!!
Ant is not giving lot of gifts though :(
My /usage is telling me '+50% weekly limits promo through Aug 19' - that's huge, and better than what I'm getting with the equivalent Codex plan I have right now. Though what Codex does have over Claude is Sol /fast - that hands down is the best coding experience right now.
FWIW, this was announced before the day where the +50% limit promotion from May was supposed to end, so effectively continuing the promotion. This will mean that you retain the same usage instead of seeing it drop.
I guess if they'd reduce the usage in their current stage they'll only lose customers - this is not a perk, it's damage control.
https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15910845-claude-code-...
Being able to use Fable with subscription plans is a gift.
Ant has quota resets two or three times a month, at least for me.
Crazy value for money now with the banked resets. At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible. On my codex pro plan, I am 5.6 sol'ing my way everyday with the odd ultra mode. Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
API pricing itself might have extreme margins compared to the real cost. Anyway, in my testing the Pro 20x $200 plan gives you about $2200 API-equivalent weekly usage if you're only using GPT 5.6 Sol, so quite close to $9k-$10k/month API-equivalent, it's a bit inconsistent with cache costs.
It's very interesting that for Anthropic the $100 and $200 plans only differ 2x in weekly limits, the 5 hour limit differences are more severe. But for OpenAI, Pro 20x is, well, 4x of Pro 5x for only 2x cost. So, for example, 100% of weekly usage for Codex on a Plus ($20) account is just 5% of weekly usage for Codex on Pro 20x.
And you can calculate how much extra usage you can get from resets, and especially banked resets by purposefully using the whole quota and using your banked reset - they expire 30 days after they're given out, so if you don't use one, it just disappears.
Edit:
The $200 plan is explicitly 4x the $100 plan[1] only for "per session". That's so vague. I initially pushed back against your claim, but reading now Anthropic is not at all clear, in fact.
[1] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11049741-what-is-the-...
Empirically it is quite easy to validate that the "20x" plan is misleading and only give you twice the weekly limits of the "5x" plan, and many people on r/ClaudeAI, etc can verify that.
Anthropic is also the one often playing games with:
* The "+30% tokens" tokeniser, alongside also gating token counting behind an API (versus the MIT tiktoken for OpenAI), so who knows if it's really a new tokeniser or of it's just a disguised price increase.
* Prompt injections appended to API (not just Claude.ai or Claude Code!), such as <ethics_reminders>, or LCRs (long conversation reminders), which you never asked but still pay for with expensive API. You can detect this because your input_tokens, as reported by the Messages response, sometimes don't match, and are higher than your actual input.
(Alternatively, for testing purposes, create a tool like `telemetry_log_anthropic_reminder` or something and instruct your system prompt to require Claude to call the tool anytime it detects any Anthropic/Claude reminder masquerading in the user input -- mostly reliable; but misses some reminders).
In particular, the long conversational reminders, when incorrectly triggered by a classifier and (almost silently, unless you track tokens) appended to an API / agentic coding session, can ruin your agent's performance; and it often fires repeatedly once the classifier kicks in.
If you're using Anthropic API, you need to set up metrics/logging for how often they are appending things to your prompt without your knowledge.
So far I have not empirically observed prompt injection by the OpenAI API, only Anthropic APIs.
I just upgraded from Pro to Max 5x and I’m getting about 3.5x not 5x
How do you spend so much? Our company also has Claude enterprise pricing. I have a monthly limit of $800, I use Opus for everything, and I'm around the limit after the month. Genuinely can't imagine spending 12 times as many tokens without intentionally trying to waste money.
I am not trying to tokenmaxx, but I will work on 2-3 tickets simultaneously in seperate terminals (worktrees). Also having Claude triage and check logs etc. - plus the odd bit of project planning in Claude desktop/cowork. We also have a triage agent skill for the work I’m doing which fans out. All in all deadlines looming so it’s been a case of pump out the work and prove the product. I suppose if you’re in more a BAU state this kind of usage is overkill.
Curious, does Anthropic force companies of a certain size like yours to their Enterprise plans? Or was it by choice for the enterprise features?
Because with a Premium Team seat I run 2-3 vscodes with Opus 4.8 Max all day and never seem to hit my limits.
Yes, past 150 seats you have to switch to Enterprise (IIRC)
Yes Team is max 150 users (except maybe grandfathered accounts).
The solution is to use individual Max plans, but then you miss Enterprise management features.
> then you miss Enterprise management features
On the flip side you gain $9,800 a month.
Yeah makes sense to me
> Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
I think it’s funny that everyone anchors to the API pricing as the real cost.
Most likely is that their API costs are printing profits. They can sell the subscription plans at a slight loss because it gets more people like you hooked on GPT models at home and suggesting them at work, where the real money is made.
I think their subscription plans go mostly unused when averaged across all subscribers, too. Some customers are getting great deals by maxing out 100% every week, but most probably use much less.
The reset game is an addictive challenge that gets the hardcore users more hooked on their products because you feel pressured to use it as much as you can before the next unpredictable surprise reset lands.
Idk, Kimi K3 is not that much cheaper than Opus and it’s probably a smaller model. We’ll know for certain when commodity providers price it, but I expect it to be the same price.
It really depends on caching[1] and active parameters, and some dark arts really only possible at Hyperscalers they also have better access to 288GB VRAM B300s[2] that really makes a difference in cache space.
K3 may be bit smaller/ similar in total parameter count than Opus, but Opus (and GPT) definitely has become a lot more efficient in the last 6 months or so, hence more or less forced upgrades. I expect the active parameter count and cache performance is quite different.
--
Opus is still almost twice as expensive (if tokens were equal) at $5/$15 compared to K3 at $3/$15. Tokens are not equal though, Anthropic's tokenizer is much less dense than other frontier lab's so the actual price difference is like 3x.
Kimi uses more reasoning tokens and is generally more inefficient with its usage, that doesn't impact token cost economics for the provider though . It does for us as buyers thus the need to evaluating by Cost per task rather than unit pricing.
On pure tokens/$ - there is definitely room for a price war if operators start going by pure unit costs. Both probably want(ed) to have good enough numbers in preparing for the IPO.
---
[1] the pricing kind of reflect this already - 10x diff for uncached input.
[2] Moonshot does not have access latest gen GPUs so their unit economics is likely hampered a bit for high parameter models.
Commodity providers aren't a good indicator. They have margins too.
Remember they ~doubled the price going from GLM 5 to GLM 5.2, despite same [1] cost of inference.
[1] GLM 5.2 is actually slightly more efficient, thanks to baked in indexer cache.
These models are more fungible than you think, so these prices tend towards the cost to serve.
On openrouter GLM 5.2 is ~3x cheaper than 5.0.
My usage sky rocketed with GPT 5.6 sol thanks to all these resets. I'm pretty sure this is not sustainable for me.
Kicking myself that I didn't use one of my 4 resets which just expired, but then again, they reset our usage anyway. We are just blasting away with 5.6-Sol-ultra, doing a project I wouldn't have otherwise done (basically drastically editing someone's novel for them and adding illustrations).
Does the company actually gets any value close to your salary + benefits + ~15k$ you gonna burn this month?
Yes I honestly think if we pull it off the revenue would easily pay off. Otherwise an expensive experiment, but with fewer staff so the damage is less than it used to be and a verdict much faster.
Here it's only Microsoft (ghcp) allowed, and 39$ per month is considered ludicrous with no way to increase. Ah Europe
Sounds less a Europe thing and more a "your company" thing. Our company gives Claude Premium to everyone.
not a Europe thing
$10,000 in less than three weeks is incredible. The bean counters sure have a blind spot for AI…
That’s less than the fully loaded cost of hiring another engineer.
If someone is making the case that it’s helping the team get twice as much work done without hiring more people (which I’m neither agreeing with or disagreeing with) then the bean counters would actually prefer it. Hiring people is messy and expensive. Spending on API costs is a dial that you can turn down later if you need to, without laying anyone off and paying severance.
Well someone would actually have to make that case. So far nobody has been able to.
Did you ever hired another dev and made the case that he really 2x yourself?
yes but as a normal user your data and traces are being used to train AI which helps enterprise customers.
You're using Opus 4.8 and then Sonnet 5 which is both worse and more expensive in practice than Opus.
Price shock in 3...2...1...
> At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible.
A very happy gambler of tokens at the Anthropic casino, running up costs on the house at no cost to them, but to $COMPANY paying.
This is the Kimi and GLM effect.
Open Source is coming.
* open-weights
(sorry for nitpicking, i think it's important to emphasize - only OLMo has been the most most prominent fully open source release)
I really wish there was a canonical platform endpoint to programmatically check Codex usage amount and the quota reset times so I could just vibecode an app to alert "hey, your usage just went to 100% so that means OpenAI did a reset" and "hey, your 5-hour usage is at 10%, wrap up what you're doing".
The only way to do it now is through shenanigans with the Codex App Server which is not ideal.
You can use this endpoint for quota reset times.
Just ask Codex to use its local auth token as a bearer token and send a GET request to it. The response includes "available_count" and "credits[].expires_at". Or script it yourself obviously.
https://chatgpt.com/backend-api/wham/rate-limit-reset-credit...
Use CodexBar: https://github.com/steipete/CodexBar
The 5h limit is gone (for now). It does not presently need to be chased. :)
For the automated checking of other stuff: It was a one-shot prompt to get Codex clank up some Python that returns remaining usage, next reset time/date, and so on.
The result does use Codex App Server, but it's a short-lived process that is dealt with over stdio so that's... fine-ish, I guess?
I keep this bookmarked and check it frequently
https://chatgpt.com/codex/cloud/settings/analytics
The API endpoints on this page accept an OAuth token from ~/.codex/auth.json. You can simply ask Codex to create a report skill with some curl examples.
Orrrr... He could just as well click the link he has bookmarked already, and see it with his own eyes, without the token use to report on his token use.
Check this site for the first part? Maybe they can offer a notifications API, hah.
Compare to Anthropic who consistently do their resets between Thursday and Friday, somewhat alienating people who have their resets around that time.
Oh, they have free drops too? I guess dual wielding the two $20 subs is the best value option right now then.
Anthropic has been like this for a while, although in their latest announcement, the $20 tier won't have the "cheap" access to Fable, and neither will the $100 tier.
Huh, isn’t Fable going to be available indefinitely to all Max users?
Available, yes, but how it's being charged for is expected to change.
This is a useful site.
I've been enjoying the resets, plus I had 3 resets I haven't used.
Just using 5.6 Sol in Fast mode the whole time, 1B tokens per day.
However, when they removed the 5h limit they also quietly lowered the 5.6 Sol context from 354k to 258k or something like that. I noticed it in Codex.
There were a few tweets about it so they weren't super quiet about it. I think you can get it back by setting `model_context_window=YOUR_VALUE` in ~/.codex/config.toml though.
It no longer works and only respects a server supplied value now
I'm starting to think It might be a good idea to stay with American models, by virtue of them feeling so threatened they give out more and more free perks.
> I'm starting to think It might be a good idea to stay with American models, by virtue of them feeling so threatened they give out more and more free perks.
If you keep staying with them, they'd feel less and less threatened.
You need to use them about half as much as you do a Chinese model so that the usage stats that get collected show them that they are still losing users (and attention) to the Chinese models.
Is Claude also doing something like this? I saw my Fable limit resetting earlier than expected.
I've had this too on my personal pro plan and also when I run the usage command it says it's resetting tomorrow rather than getting cut off.
I'm trying to squeeze what I can in the meantime but I feel like they said it was getting cut off multiple times and they keep extending and possibly resetting it (havent been looking close enough to know for sure)
https://x.com/claudeai/status/2078302415804379218
No, they've been clear about the fact that Fable is staying in indefinitely now.
They also extended the 50% extra usage thing through to August 19.
Looks like no Fable for Pro. Will likely be cancelling my Pro account.
They had an issue yesterday that said Fable needed extra usage.
I’m guessing they’re getting ready.
It did once. That's all I know of though. Nothing like Codex.
Nope. Anthropic is incredibly greedy and always has been.
They're far shorter of GPUs, apparently. OpenAI made huge hardware deals last year (which look less crazy now).
OpenAI should have just focussed on Coding instead of wasting time with Sora.
Well yeah they realised that
hese resets are a trap. They're artificially anchoring our workflows to a massive baseline, trapping us for the inevitable 5x price hike when the market finally consolidates.
i just need one more, the last one, i swear
Forgive my ignorance... Usage limits reset for 100% of customers at the same instant?
Originally yes, everyone's usage limit went back to 100% at the same time regardless of if you were at 0% or 99%. Now they tend to give out "banked" resets where users can choose when to use it for up to a month (except the most recent one, which I think was non-banked)
They realized the banked resets were too expensive, so they stopped giving those out for the last 2 resets.
Are they more expensive? I think it's a clever tactic that avoids sudden increased workload, because users may "save" their resets when they need some additional work done.
Over the last 2 weeks, 6 of the resets are direct to the usage limit.
In the same timeframe, 2 additional resets were banked.
My next question is: why? Purely marketing tactics?
Also the fact that now you can keep unused resets and use them later is a big advantage: "You have 4 usage limit resets available".
Careful with those, they expire.
I just had one randomly delete the other day.
No, they don't apply it :/
I just learned the hard way that codex removes resets once the weekly cycle starts.
So... basically watching them set fire to money in realtime??
Yup! Big beautiful burning pile of cash. Though there’s some nuance with subsidizing inference (which is supposed to make them money long term) vs training (which we’re supposed to ignore I guess).
To be fair, they're motivating me to move from the Pro to the Max tier (the $200 one, which has 4X the usage of Pro for 2X the price).
And they can’t stop because they want to IPO soon, and stopping this madness would signal loudly that they are bleeding cash, don’t really have a business model, and might not be worth $2 trillion after all.
We lose money on every sale, but make it up in volume
Confirmed, was at 40% earlier, now at 90%
I didn't knew about these resets up until a few days back... and every time they used to reset these limits, I thought I was going crazy... the usage numbers just didn't match. And the weekly end window just kept pushing ahead by a day or a few... just the right amount of deviation to make you believe you are going crazy.
To be fair, when they reset usage for everyone (instead of a banked reset), they move your reset back a week later, so:
1. Your window ends (usage reset) in 3 days
2. They reset usage for everyone
3. Your usage goes back to 100% and your current window ends in 7 days now.
yea... it doesnt matter how much you have used.. they just shift it by entire week with 100% refill. Crazy!
Can this made into a public api of sorts so that my agents know ?
Why add a middleman when you can ask your own account with /usage?
Anthropic would say that's exactly why they're in the red.
you should periodically feed the data to chatgpt to try to predict the next reset!
Casino comp and drug dealer freebie tactics again. Shoddy business, IMO.
How long is this gonna last? OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets.
They've bought a lot of dev goodwill tho, which matters I guess.
Are Codex users even a drop in the bucket of overall use? I mean, it's a pretty specific way to interact with the bot.
Codex usage is clearly common enough to have entered the vernacular of folks here on HN.
But we aren't everyone, and it seems likely to me that there's a lot more people in the world burning tokens using ChatGPT than there are who even know what Codex is.
It is safe to assume there are more 'normal' chat sessions than 'codex' sessions, although Codex sessions likely consume 10x the tokens the average person does asking for a lasagna recipe.
> can't sustain these resets
If I would have my tin foil hat on I'd say they can manipulate how the subscription usage gets calculate during the week, so that these resets don't cost them much or anything. Sometimes it feels like the usage just disappears with nothing to show for it.
> OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets.
We don’t know that. If they have already paid for the hardware and it is not running 100%, and customers would not pay to get reset, they don’t really lose money.
I personally believe that they are buying time until they can make current gov. to bring-in a legislation that targets Chinese models one way or the other.
And now Kimi-K3 has caused a new Deepseek moment.. but this time, the only horizon that was still untouched: frontier performance.
Expect escalation of things from now on.
They also got a lot of goodwill by letting people use codex subscription in any harness they want, anywhere they want
I think it's mostly to spread hype for the new models. Sol can be ridiculously long running, even without /goal so it can run for 12hr+ on a problem with defined and verifiable output. So it's a good way for people to get hyped about the capabilities without worrying about usage limits.
coworker tried Sol the other day and it sat and thought for 10 minutes before maxing out our company's per-user weekly limit lol
Sol is really not optmised for corporate plans. The sane way to use it is via a personal subscription.
It's a pretty smart move. If they weren't doing this, I would have simply switched back to DeepSeek, Mimo, GLM, etc. (and maybe K3) whenever I hit my usage limits, as was my normal custom.
They're performing the resets when the cluster load goes down and they have sufficient capacity to handle the reset.
Capacity is one thing but inference still costs money.
I'd enable push notifications for this site
This feature has just been added!
Not to veer to far off topic, but do any of you long-term Codex users happen to know how long the Codex Resets can be banked for? I can find no indications of an expiration date in the TUI or on the Web App. From what I have searched, I have been getting somewhat mixed answers.
Anyway, I do appreciate how OpenAI seems to be far more generous with these resets than other providers. I've never come close to needing a reset yet. I have some tasks that I have been procrastinating, so my need for my resets might come in handy in the near future.
30 days
I stopped paying for Codex because of this shit. "Whoops we burned a week of 20x usage in minutes because we fucked up the cache again. You can keep paying money to get more resets to fix it"
nah, I'll use open models. Only way I'd use codex now is if it was free, and I don't mean someone else paying for it. I would rather have them pay for DSv4P or Kimi
When did that happen with Codex? I thought that was a Claude Code thing
Check the github issues brother, search for "usage". Read through the noise. Look at the dates. Don't forget the closed ones.
It's been happening every week since 5.2 was fresh. Not everyone is effected every time. Sometimes it's regional, other times it's per platform, or per version, with a feature (new or old) either enabled or disabled, or some combination of these things. Sometimes you get resets that nobody else does, other times you don't get the ones that were announced. Sometimes you get emails telling you that boosts on limits you didn't even know you had are expiring. At points it did balance out when they really fucked up metering and were underbilling by absurd factors, but that feels more like being toyed with and experimented on than a genuine mistake.
That someone had the 'brilliant' idea to add banked resets (which do expire, so you have to use or lose them, hope you didn't have other plans) says to me that they are no longer as confident about actually being able to fix this as they once were. I'm sure some amount of it is a function of compute availability and reliability, but the rest are definitely issues with the app and it's a rake they keep stomping on.
Compared to just about any other dev centric service I have paid at least $200/mo for, this does not feel very professional to me. They got $1200 outta me and it never really improved. At points I felt like I was getting my moneys worth, and I did burn through a few hundred million tokens, but the frustration of having your projects and plans interrupted and having to wait is not awesome... and then I used Deepseek V4 Pro and felt sick to my stomach with buyers remorse as I watched what it did with just $10.
I think it's perfectly normal for errors to occur given the pace of development.
Retroactive refunds are certainly better, but I think OpenAI is much more customer-focused in this regard than Anthropic.
Sure, but also who asked? And that's because they have the compute to burn, which is conditional based on their need to use it to train the next one.
Anything else I've ever paid $200/mo for, advertised as being for professionals, had a markedly better customer experience. If you wanna be Patrick and tell your pet rock to take its time at that price, well then you're Patrick. Good job!
I'm having far more fun with Kimi and Deepseek, at lower prices, without these problems. And I don't have to follow a bunch of obnoxious shitposters to stay clued in on what the fuck is going on or what this week's excuse is.
They're especially cocky right now, they have to beat their chest and pretend like their only competition is Anthropic. They're in for a rough wake up call man. Playing it fast and loose with developer loyalty is a fantastic way to get burned when options like those exist. They are earnestly just as good and in some cases better, and check this out: nobody can take them away from you no matter where you live. If you want to rent 8 GPUs and run the open models yourself, you can do that! You can even be enterprising and sell your excess compute to your friends, or strangers. Best to figure this out before the regulatory capture starts
> No schedule. No changelog. Only the feed. We watch it so you don't have to.
Using genai for such a bland text. The slop intensifies.
67
I love Codex!
really need one soon .... gpt sol used up all my banked resets
there's now a live status page tracking when a trillion-dollar company decides to hand out free compute, and refreshing it at 2am feels like a completely reasonable thing to do
there is now a dedicated dashboard tracking when a tech company resets its own rate limits and it is somehow more reliable than the actual product status page
Great now what about one for Claude Code?
ai tools now becoming expensive + too rate limits even on paid plans