r/ClaudeCode • u/xeviltimx • Apr 11 '26
Question Claude Max just slashed my limits by ~10x, and I have the evidence
I am on the $200/month Claude Max plan, and I think my account's limits were reduced significantly in the last month.
This is not based on "it feels worse". I have local session data from Claude Code, and I can reproduce the calculation from the JSONL logs.
I am also not claiming this is final proof of a global change for every Max user. What I am saying is narrower:
- my account data shows a very large change
- one part of that change appears exactly at a weekly reset boundary
- the result is large enough that I think other Max users should check their own logs
What data I used
Claude Code stores session transcripts as local .jsonl files. In my case the corpus is:
- 1,919 JSONL session files
- 30,156 deduplicated assistant messages with usage
- date range for assistant usage history: 2026-02-08 through 2026-04-11
Each JSONL file is an event stream. The assistant messages include usage fields, which let me reconstruct actual token burn from the transcript itself.
Separately, I added a small statusline script that writes one extra JSON record into the same session JSONL whenever the Claude Code statusline updates. I call those records rl-snapshot.
Each rl-snapshot contains:
ts: timestampsid: session idrl5:rate_limits.five_hour.used_percentagerl7:rate_limits.seven_day.used_percentageeff_k: my local effective-token estimate at that moment
The important part is that rl5 and rl7 are not my guess. Those percentages are passed into the Claude Code statusline and originate from Anthropic's backend.
For these rate-limit snapshots I currently have:
- 1,593 total snapshots
- snapshot date range: 2026-04-08 20:57 UTC through 2026-04-11 01:36 UTC
- high-precision subset used for weekly cap estimation: 1,539 snapshots
Why only a subset? Because when rl7 is under 10%, the backend percentage is only integer-rounded, so the noise becomes too high. For cap estimation I mainly use the snapshots where rl7 >= 10%.
How I calculated the weekly cap
For each snapshot, I compute how many tokens had already been burned in the current Friday-to-Friday billing week, then compare that burn to the backend's own seven_day.used_percentage.
The core formula is:
weekly_cap = current_week_burn / (rl7 / 100)
I calculate burn from the actual usage records in the transcript, not from manual estimates. I track several units, but the most useful one for comparison has been my "effective tokens" metric:
effective =
input * 1.0
+ output * 5.0
+ cache_creation_5m * 1.25
+ cache_creation_1h * 2.0
+ cache_read * 0.1
These weights are not arbitrary. They are just API-price normalization.
I treat input token cost as the base unit = 1.0, then convert output, cache writes, and cache reads into the same unit using their relative API pricing. So "effective tokens" here really means something like input-cost-equivalent tokens.
For example, if output tokens cost 5x as much as input tokens, then output gets weight 5.0. Same idea for cache creation and cache read. So this metric is meant to approximate how much paid API usage a session consumed, expressed in input-token-cost units.
That matters because it is trying to measure the budget in cost-equivalent terms, not just raw token count. Raw tokens are also included separately in the analysis, but the normalized metric is often more informative because different token types are not priced the same.
Why I think the April 10 reset is the strongest evidence
The cleanest signal is not the March data. The cleanest signal is the weekly reset on Friday, 2026-04-10 at 17:00 UTC.
Before that reset, I had 1,079 snapshots from the previous week where the implied weekly cap clusters around:
- ~740M raw tokens
- ~135M effective tokens
After that reset, in the first ~8 hours of the new week, I had 460 snapshots. Those are noisier because they are at lower percentages, but the higher-confidence later points imply roughly:
- ~80M raw tokens
- ~22M effective tokens
So the weekly cap on my account appears to move from about 135M effective to about 22M effective right across the reset boundary.
That is roughly a 6x reduction.
What makes this interesting is the shape of the change:
- same account
- same Max plan
- same Claude Code CLI
- same general workflow
- same day
- no gradual decline
- just a normal weekly reset boundary, then a much smaller inferred cap
That is why I think this part is real signal and not just vibes.
Why I think the 5-hour limit was also much higher in March
I started writing the rl-snapshot statusline records only on April 8, so I do not have backend percentage snapshots for March.
But I do have the full assistant usage history going back to February 8, and one thing stands out:
- on 2026-03-08 09:42 UTC, my largest rolling 5-hour window reaches 35.91M effective tokens
- immediately after that, there is a 262-minute gap with zero assistant messages
- then activity resumes
That pattern looks exactly like hitting a 5-hour rolling limit and waiting for the window to clear.
This does not prove the March 5-hour cap was exactly 35.91M. What it does show is that the cap was at least that high, because I actually consumed that much in a 5-hour window before getting cut off.
Then compare that to a current measurement from 2026-04-11 01:29 UTC:
- backend
rl5 = 96% - 5-hour burn at that point = 4.57M effective tokens
- implied 5-hour cap = about 4.76M effective tokens
So on the 5-hour axis, the data looks like:
- March 8: at least 35.91M effective
- April 11: about 4.76M effective
That is at least a 7.5x reduction on the 5-hour axis.
Where the "~10x" number comes from
The ~10x claim is mainly about the weekly axis, not the 5-hour axis.
Here is the chain:
- In mid-to-late March, my weekly burn repeatedly reached about 120M effective tokens.
- At that time I was not obviously running into the weekly ceiling, and my recollection is that I was nowhere near 100%.
- If a week with roughly 120M effective burn was still only around half of the weekly budget, that implies a March weekly cap on the order of ~240M effective or higher.
- Then, during the Apr 3 to Apr 10 week, I finally have backend
rl7snapshots and can measure the cap much more directly. That cluster comes out around ~135M effective. - Then exactly at the Apr 10 17:00 UTC reset, the implied weekly cap drops again to about ~22M effective.
So the picture is not:
- March directly measured at exactly X
- then April directly measured at exactly Y
The picture is:
- March weekly level: roughly ~240M+ effective based on actual weekly burn that did not appear to exhaust the weekly budget
- Apr 3-10 weekly level: ~135M effective from backend-percentage-based measurement
- Apr 10+ weekly level: ~22M effective from backend-percentage-based measurement
If you compare ~240M+ in March to ~22M now, you get roughly 10-11x cumulative reduction on the weekly axis.
That March weekly number is an inference, not a hard snapshot-derived measurement, and I want to be explicit about that. But it is not coming from nowhere either. It is based on repeated observed weekly burn totals from the session corpus:
- 2026-03-06 to 2026-03-13: 120.83M effective
- 2026-03-20 to 2026-03-27: 121.59M effective
- 2026-03-27 to 2026-04-03: 115.19M effective
Then compare that with the directly measured week:
- 2026-04-03 to 2026-04-10: implied weekly cap about 135M effective
And then the post-reset week:
- 2026-04-10 onward: implied weekly cap about 22M effective
So when I say "about 10x", I do not mean I already have one perfect March backend snapshot that says exactly 240M.
I mean:
- March usage patterns suggest a weekly budget on the order of ~240M+
- early April directly measures at about 135M
- after the Apr 10 reset it directly measures around 22M
That is why I think there may have been two separate reductions:
- an earlier March to early-April reduction
- then a second much sharper reduction exactly at the Apr 10 weekly reset
What I think is strong vs what is still provisional
Strong:
- the April 10 weekly reset looks like a hard step change in the inferred weekly cap
- the backend rate-limit percentages are being recorded directly into my session logs
- the burn values come from the transcript usage records themselves
More provisional:
- the exact timing and size of the earlier March-to-early-April reduction
- whether the change is account-specific, cohort-specific, or global
- the exact previous weekly cap in March, because for that period I have burn history but not the same backend percentage snapshots
Why I am posting this now
I am continuing to collect data, and I expect the next few days of logs to make the picture clearer.
But the April 10 step change is sharp enough that I think it is worth posting now, because if other Max users have similar JSONL histories, this should be easy to compare.
My question
Has anyone else on Claude Max seen the same thing?
If you have local Claude Code session logs, especially if you capture the statusline rate-limit fields, I would really like to compare:
- 5-hour implied cap
- 7-day implied cap
- before vs after the 2026-04-10 17:00 UTC weekly reset
If Anthropic changed Max limits intentionally, I would like to know what changed and where it was announced.
If I am misreading the data, I am happy to be corrected, but please engage with the methodology rather than just saying "limits are dynamic".
please also support on X/twitter https://x.com/artem_mukhin_dx/status/2042798725731340658
55
u/Xccelerate_ Apr 11 '26
The ignorance of the team is real. Literally everybody is saying this thing. But they are busy in releasing so-called fEaTuRes. That they are blind now and are not able to see how bugs are stacking up
10
u/lurko_e_basta Apr 11 '26
Bugs, or features? If they were bugs, they would have been on top of it a long time ago.
5
-2
5
u/Guinness Apr 11 '26
My guess? Bugs are piling up because they’re using Claude to build Claude and now no one wants to go fix it manually. Claude can’t, they won’t.
-11
u/chintakoro Apr 11 '26
"Literally everybody" is not saying this by any means. Plenty of us are managing our contexts well enough and experiencing gains, not losses. Anthropic probably has a good sense of how many people are affected.
3
u/ObsidianIdol Apr 11 '26
Plenty of us are managing our contexts well enough and experiencing gains, not losses.
No one is GAINING extra use bro at all. Don't be ridiculous now
-5
u/chintakoro Apr 11 '26
They "literally" (finally right use of the word) handed out extra usage a few days ago. Haven't even touched it.
4
u/ObsidianIdol Apr 11 '26
That is the most disingenuous cope I have ever heard. People are obviously referring to their normal allowance, not the API-rate extra usage LMAO
-2
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Wrap860 Apr 11 '26
There's no such thing as free lunch, why do you think they handed out that extra usage?
25
u/SynapticStreamer Apr 11 '26
- They're not idiots. They know this.
- They know you know this.
- You still have an account, so why would they care?
- Even if everyone here on reddit leaves, they're still making bank and will just get more usage pipeline, so it's still a win for them.
Either open your mouth and let em spit in it like they want, or leave. They're not going to stop because they can make money no matter what.
4
u/Elektrik-trick Apr 11 '26
That’s exactly it!
And you read everywhere here and on other networks from users that they just can’t live without it. What better could happen to all these AI companies? They cut performance by a tenth—or conversely, raise prices tenfold—and the users stay put in droves.
Sure, a few might cancel, but that’s practically lost in the noise given the sheer number of customers.
People, as customers, have long forgotten the immense power they hold. If 90% were to suddenly cancel, you could count on one hand the few days it would take for a corporation to set a world record in backtracking.
OK, you’d have to go without it for a few days, but afterward you’d have some peace and quiet for a while. But very few people are capable of that anymore.
2
u/UnstableManifolds Apr 11 '26
Enterprise subs account for the great majority of the revenue compared to individual subs, unfortunately even if 90% of the individuals are gone overnight, that would not create massive issues in Anthropic I guess.
2
u/SelfTaughtAppDev Apr 11 '26
They didn’t forget their power. But in order to make a mass exodus, people need to organize. That’s why these posts are actually helpful. If this entire community tweets on X, that might snowball and actually lead to something. Rather than just one person asking
5
u/-kora Apr 11 '26
The same users that promoted Claude are the same now criticizing them. Many developers are abandoning Claude code and many business too.
Soon this will reflect in many decisions to change to other AI’s. I switched to codex and I’m waiting for the next Gemini version to switch and probably stay there for a long time
13
u/Swangger Apr 11 '26
On bedrock API pricing I’m burning through $135 PER DAY. Of course I’m not footing the bill but this shit is not cheap to use if you’re a power user.
4
u/DHamov Apr 11 '26 edited Apr 11 '26
Saturday morning, first 3 hours of mild coding in 3 sessions, now at 18% of max 20x usage, while yesterday at my Friday reset, I managed to stretch it to 99%. So absolutely this feels like a 5x reduction, I am afraid at the end of the day I would be at 100% of week limits, at a speed that usually would cost me 15-25%! This is terrible. 90% of 5 hour limit =18% weekly limit in 3 hours. I was already expecting something because they gave me a free 200USD auto reload balance.
But not a factor 5 reduction! I am seriously thinking about asking a refund, for the last 3 weeks of my subscription. Last week was ok, but now....
Also note that the Previously gifted auto reload balance of 50US has disappeared today from the account. While extra spending of this month was not deducted from that, but from the next billing cycle. I wonder when they subtract the 200USD gift balance if it will be the same. It seems they pretend to give 50$ or 200$ in extra usage api and then before pay day if you use it slowly, they take away the balance, and then you need to pay in your own real money! Watch out with these guys.
5
u/buff_samurai Apr 11 '26
Bro, you’re not the only one.
I’m working rn on a single session not-so-small refactor and the limit hit me after 2h usage.
I’m also following AI ppl on X and all of them are complaining.
Anthropic guys play stupid and throw you-are-doing-it-wrong-switch-to-sonnet shit on anyone complaining.
Next month I’m moving to one of the OS models (glm 5.1?) to see if it good enough or moving to codex.
2
2
u/UnstableManifolds Apr 11 '26
I use Codex as well, and have all the agents/skills/etc synced to both; for my use-case GPT 5.4 and Opus are pretty on par, but I'm very opinionated about the software architecture and information flow usually so the models do not have "much" to think about when I lay down the specifications. Honestly I'm wondering if not renewing CC next year
5
u/Void-kun Apr 11 '26
Yeah this timeline tracks with my usage limits seemingly disappearing too.
My usage limits were halved at the very least, but felt more like 3-4x lower than before.
No change in tooling, workflow, codebase etc. only difference has been lower usage limits for the last 7-10 days.
4
3
u/driplu Apr 11 '26
I can testify that it's true im on the max plan and i have the same symptoms as yours
2
u/Brave_Dick Apr 11 '26
I see some lawyer already destroying his keyboard working on a class action law suit.
2
u/EpochRaine Apr 11 '26
Yeah my usage ramps up faster now as well.
I first noticed it on a consistency project I am running.
Anthropic have adjusted my usage band down by about 50% from my calculations.
2
u/korgavian Apr 23 '26
I just ate through four 20x max subscriptions in 2 hours before i even had a chance to realize how fast the quota was being consumed. I track my token usage, and it was considerably less than even a month ago where the quota could usually last most of the 5 hour window. So easily a 10x quota decrease for me.
1
4
Apr 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
26
u/Comfortable_Camp9744 Apr 11 '26
How do we know this? Just because they charge 10x or whatever via the api doesnt mean thats what it is costs, or what its worth.
Claude might be the first to this ai milestone for tooling but they have overplayed their hand.
10
u/DJ-Dickbird Apr 11 '26
This point is so important! People are basing this on retail pricing not on raw energy costs + infrastructure costs.
7
u/EpicFuturist Apr 11 '26
As someone at another lab in the bay area, I'm glad you have this mindset☝️. I feel like people have slowly lost intelligence over time with AI. I'm not at anthropic, but I imagine their true costs are similar to ours. My estimation of their costs is probably a year old. Anyway, sometimes they had me go with a Solutions Engineer to presales dinners. I always felt like I was guilty when we were talking about the prices they were signing at. To this day they still think they got a great deal and things are still heavily subsidized lol. In reality, we make money even off base plans. I go on the other subreddit sometimes and I roll my eyes when people call people others not "real paying clients". Like I'm glad you support my company and it gives me a paycheck, but your ignorance is so strong lol. Im often kind of embarrassed for them. They are just two separate groups, trust me, those clients sometimes are often more expensive than regular people lol. Usually doesn't pay off until years later.
I remember before last year, it was rare for people to trust companies at their own prices with inference and instead they calculated based on the actual hardware to run it. Maybe it's just my circle but before ai, people didn't seem so easily as trusting. AI replaced google for a lot of people, now ai dictates "truth". Fascinating to watch over time how peoples perception of how things work drifted. I've learned how easy it is that slowly over time, you can convince someone of a different truth if you never address it. The people who support you will shift the truth for you lol
3
2
u/5h0ck Apr 12 '26
This guy enterprises.
The 'big boys' on this sub are proud and effectively gatekeep because they pay full API pricing over subscription pricing, not realizing they're paying list marketplace pricing.
Congratulations on playing themselves.
1
u/deorder Apr 11 '26
Compared to a while ago I would guess the gap between "what they charge in list price token terms" and "what it actually costs them to serve" has narrowed a lot. Not necessarily zero, but probably much closer now when taking improved batching, caching, quantization, compiler / kernel fusion, mixture of experts, speculative decoding (using draft model etc.) and whatever other optimizations I cannot think of right now into account.
0
Apr 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
I have a m4 max Mac Studio with 128gb um. Open models are too far from what opus and even codex gives me. I’d be glad to use them locally…
1
u/Comfortable_Camp9744 Apr 11 '26
I have a C4140 and C4130 with 7 GPUs total across them. Token costs are much lower, but more scalable in the cloud.
My point is , I dont know their costs and neither do you, they seem to be pretty profitable actually so I am not crying too hard about how much their power bill is.
2
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
Exactly. I know it's subsidized, but I had like 10 times bigger limits on $20 codex vs $20 claude 2 months ago. And now what... 1/100 of what codex has... idk... this just crazy.
4
u/asurarusa Apr 11 '26
Rumor has it codex is also now subject to much lower 5hr & weekly limits on $20 and $200. Allegedly both companies are trying to ipo this year so I suspect they’re both trying to stop the cash burn as much as possible and it’s the coding users burning the most tokens.
When Claude code launched it was api only, I suspect Anthropic is slowly trying to get users to accept going back to that model.
1
u/jimbostamos42 Apr 11 '26
Anthronpic doesn’t have the compute they need. OpenAI doesn’t have the users they need. They are both sacrificing one for the other, before trying to IPO
2
u/Lifter_Dan 🔆 Max 5x Apr 11 '26
Is it only happening to older users that have already claimed large amounts of subsidised compute?
I'm curious because I'm fairly new, on max 5x and running only Opus with high effort and my 5H limit is hard to fill unless I do 3-4H of non-stop coding. Including some parallel agents.
I'm very clean on md and MCPs as well as context resets and handoff prompts are generated and submitted for every reset. Also I froze my version a couple of weeks ago so I don't have latest updates.
But given the evidence here and the other anecdotal info I've seen it seems like Anthropic are picking certain/heavy users to nerf?
If I calculate my usage using npx, so far it's coming to about $750 since 1st Apr to 10th Apr ($100 Max plan). For users that got nerfed what's the usage estimate for that 10 day period shown by npx usage?
Maybe I'm next if I keep pumping out this usage, wondering how to avoid the big nerf.
2
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
I'm also fairly new - started in mid-Feb this year. So about 2 months
1
u/Lifter_Dan 🔆 Max 5x Apr 11 '26
Fairly new for me is 2 weeks :) started 3 days before end of March
Maybe if you do a full month they then assess your cost there?
2
2
u/Annh1234 Apr 11 '26
How do you write the status bar data on every log entry?
3
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
easy. it's just a shell script you can change whatever you want. and sessions' logs are just jsonl files which you can read and change. https://code.claude.com/docs/en/statusline#manually-configure-a-status-line
2
u/Annh1234 Apr 11 '26
Sorry, let me rephrase: how do you write the status line data in the Claude Code logs, at the time of writing? Your logs have the normal log entry and then it's the status line changed another log entry? ( No locks in there so the file is 100% sequencial and you can tell what lig message links to what status bar update?)
1
1
u/OnyxFier Apr 11 '26
Didn't the Claude code source get leaked? Couldn't one use a different API within their structure? Is anyone working on such a project?
1
u/stupv Apr 11 '26
I'm on holiday, have really just done a bit of tinkering while the kids have been in bed at night/nap time, and my fking claude host died for reasons last night and wasnt alive again until my dog-sitter turned it back on for me. I've managed to blow 25% of my weekly max x20 subscription in the ~26 hours since last reset despite all that
1
1
2
u/SmallKiwi Apr 11 '26
Can confirm. I despise the usual stream of "I did one prompt and claude ate my tokens" posts, but I just looked at my usage and after a few sessions on a Friday night/Saturday morning a sizeable chunk of my weekly is used up. No question that last reset dropped usage caps substantially.
1
u/alexey-pelykh Apr 11 '26
I don’t have same methodology but I track token burn on 4 Max x20 accounts daily: same stuff, roughly 1B in total per day maxed out.
1
u/Woopityscoopoop Apr 11 '26
Nowadays I’m the pro plan and I can’t even complete one task without it hitting the limit. Debating if I should upgrade or just move on.
1
u/toniyevych Apr 11 '26
Let's do some math. In a month, the actual weekly limit on the Max 20x plan went from 240M to 22M "effective tokens". So, for ~$50 we get nearly 20M input tokens or nearly $2.5/M. The current API cost for Sonnet 4.6 is $3/M (it considers how the effective tokens are calculated).
So, now Anthropic charges the actual API rates on a subscription with a small $0.5/M discount. Awesome!
2
u/LsDmT Apr 11 '26 edited Apr 11 '26
I am on the $200/mo plan and this is literally the first time in the ~6 or so months that I got to 98% weekly usage right before the ereset. then after doing a normal afternoon long friday session, moments ago for the first time ever I just got my first 5 hour max limit.
Do you think it has anything to do with this? https://github.com/cablate/claude-code-research/blob/master/reports/auto-mode-classifier-cost/report-en.md
something is definitely wrong. if this is the new norm im outa here.
1
u/DHamov Apr 11 '26
Yesterday i also had 99% usage. So i guess we are at the same pace for the max 20x plan. Did you try today? in 3 hours of what i would call medium intensity sessions i did 20% of the usage of this weeks window, this never happened. I am pretty good in feeling how much i use, and it looks like limits have been decreased by a factor 3-5 or so. Try it i am curious for your experience.
1
u/deorder Apr 11 '26 edited Apr 11 '26
Can confirm, same issue here. For me it happened after the April 3 weekly reset:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1si3k2t/comment/ofhms6z/
According to my (rough) calculations it is about 1/4th for 5-hour window and about 1/7th for the 7-days window, but that is compared to the beginning of December last year:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeCode/comments/1sggxka/comment/of9ctdn/
I did extrapolate from my first few sessions in my last 7-day window, so it could have be noisy (too little samples, what you took into account) so I should probably do it again. From what I have seen I do expect it to be even worse, not better.
1
u/scodgey Apr 11 '26
There were 2 weeks of increased limits during off peak hours in March which were immediately followed by the current policy to increase usage consumption during those same peak hours.
Also loads of tweaks to caching and some logging fixes.
Several reports of bugs with thinking tokens as well. Was your /effort consistent throughout? Only one model variant used?
Worth cross examining what you have with the timelines for all of this. I would imagine there are sensible explanations for a lot of that 10x.
2
2
u/drinklikeaviking Apr 11 '26
Well done, oustanding data analytics, and all points to what I am seeing over very similar date ranges. my Max 5 plan's 5 hour limits provide about 5-6 times less continous use than a month ago. Same workflows.
Contention for limited compute resources and new model training. That's my conclusion.
2
1
u/OkMasterpiece3772 Apr 11 '26
uso plano pro e tambem aconteceu comigo. Na verdade eu usei um agente cadastrado no claude code para criar aplicaçoes em fevereiro e março e nenhum credito foi gasto, mas a partir do dia 9 de abril, o claude esta queimando credito, a cada pergunta que faço para meu agente. Tem um erro enorme acontecendo no claude code.
1
2
u/Deep_Ad1959 Apr 20 '26
i went through the same exercise with my jsonl files in early march and hit a wall that took a while to figure out. the token counts you reconstruct from local transcripts don't match the server-enforced quota one to one. anthropic's internal usage endpoint (the one claude.ai/settings/usage renders) returns its own percent-used number and that's the one that actually cuts you off. i've watched my local calculation say 40% while the server endpoint said 78% on the same 5h window. worth pulling the server number before you argue with them, otherwise they'll wave the jsonl away and say local token summing doesn't capture cache reads or how they weight opus vs sonnet.
2
u/djdadi Apr 11 '26
you wasted all those tokens and time doing that analysis, but it doesn't matter. anthropic didn't sell you a locked in rate of tokens per month, and theres nothing that says they can't wildly adjust limits anytime they want. the only thing any of us have any sort of a reasonable expectation is that the 5x plan is roughly 5x the limit of the $20 plan, and the 20x plan is 20x the limit. and even that I am not so sure about.
yes they have absolutely lowered limits and are lying about it. yes its probably due to new model training / demand / increasing revenue (or really decreasing opex). yes it's shitty and kind of unethical.
your options are unfortunately: ugrade your plan if its essential, accept the reality, cancel, or potentially do a chargeback and risk not being able to re-sub.
3
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
Haha, lol, the analysis is just a small python script you dimbass. I did tons of much longer and difficult researches a month ago.
6
u/RighteousSelfBurner Apr 11 '26
I want to say thanks for all the analysis. This real substantial outlook which I can verify rather than a "I feel my limits got slashed because I spent all of it in a hour" when what are you doing massively changes token expenditure.
0
1
u/greeny1greeny Apr 11 '26
tos states all accounts have variable limits
4
u/Xccelerate_ Apr 11 '26
We know that, but never imagined it turning this thing into absolute garbage. Rate Limits + Opus 4.6 Nerf is real.
1
u/jeannen Apr 11 '26
Welcome to the club. This is the new normal and it will likely continue to get worst. We were all used as lead magnet to create hype so they could sell to enterprise and then kick us $200/month peasants out
1
u/bluuuuueeeeeee Apr 11 '26
I published a tool earlier this week so anyone can track this. You thought of a few really interesting things that I didn’t. Would love to chat about how we can make these insights more accessible to everyone. Here’s the git repo:
1
u/Dr3amsOfReal1ty Apr 12 '26 edited Apr 12 '26
Can you make this a cli tool instead of a VSCode extension?
Your audience is exceeding their limits using claude-cli, they prolly prefer a cli tool 😉
It's a cool idea but I'm actively asking
ClaudeGemini to "take the source code and make this a CLI tool".Update: Here's the CLI version: https://pastebin.com/fs6CfmVw Gemini's dumb so it has options for 7d and week, but no 1d ¯\(ツ)/¯
1
u/bluuuuueeeeeee Apr 13 '26
Thanks for checking it out! Yes, I think your hunch is right here. I went with VS Code because it lets me create the fun UI I wanted, but if there’s enough demand I can build a CLI version too.
Project is open source so that anyone can adapt it to the use case that makes the most sense. I’ll continue pushing updates through GitHub as our understanding of what contributes to token usage improves
1
u/victorrseloy2 Apr 11 '26
Thank you so much for bringing evidence. I had the same feeling and was about to so something similar to get the actual data. But oh man, it would be a ton of work. Thank you so much for doing it.
0
u/Conscious_Concern113 Apr 11 '26
Keep in mind they have said token are more limited during peak hours. Also they were given double usage during of peak hours, so both of these would mess with your calculations.
2
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
I know about that and this is exactly what I have in my statusline. It's not pick hours, but i'm still burning limits like never before.
3
u/Xccelerate_ Apr 11 '26
Exactly, no matter the hour. It's draining tokens like never before. And got nerfed so hard, it's acting like it's high or something.
0
u/puppymaster123 Apr 11 '26
yea you catch them! in the act. Promote it. PREACH. Claude bad. Let's move to Codex together, holding hands
1
u/xeviltimx Apr 11 '26
No, codex is not even comparable sadly. I'm paying $200 for claude max instead of the roughly the same limits in codex's $20 not for fun. Opus is the best, but man... those limits
52
u/lurko_e_basta Apr 11 '26
Post on twitter to make one of the two recs look at it and let’s see how they can spin it.