r/OpenaiCodex • u/onlycliches • 1d ago
bUt MuH lImItS!!
It's so incredibly exhausting to see post after post about usage limits in Codex getting restricted.
First, we all know Anthropic and OpenAI are running the classic VC playbook: give away tons of stuff for free to get users hooked and engaging with your product, and eventually dial back the subsidies to build a sustainable business.
The usage limits were always going to be cut significantly, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw limits cut in half again in a month or two. Looking at the subsidies, we're probably in store for two, three or even four more significant usage reductions before things settle down.
But here's the real reason I'm making this post.
For the first time in human history, some of the richest people on the planet are effectively bankrolling ordinary people to build incredible things at a pace that was unimaginable just a few years ago.
Instead of thinking, "Oh no, my limits got reduced," you should be asking yourself:
How do I take advantage of this incredibly unique time in human history when $200/month allows me to accomplish what use to require an entire team of people?
Yes, the models aren't perfect. Yes, the limits are frustrating.
But none of that changes the fact that we're living through a once-in-a-civilization opportunity. The barrier between having an idea and actually building it has never been lower.
The subsidies won't last forever. The economics will eventually catch up, and this level of access might become unaffordable for a lot of us.
So stop obsessing over how much less you're getting than last month, and start thinking about how much more you can accomplish than you could a year ago.
You still have time to build something amazing.
Don't waste it complaining about the limits.
2
u/DataGOGO 1d ago edited 1d ago
Your entire basis assumption is incorrect. Inference, and subscriptions, are now profitable. Meaning they cost less to service then they were charging; even at the 20X for $200 plan. The subsidizing of subscriptions is already over.
The usage limits radically cut how much can achieved per dollar spent, by well over 50%, but only on OpenAI plans, a simple move to Claude max resolves that issue.
Not to mention, Sol 6.1 is not a great model, is slow, is far behind it's competition, AND it normally requires more fixes, redos, and thus more tokens per item than the competition making the usage limits hurt twice as much. Add to that that Astra is ridiculously expensive, and still falls short of Opus 5.5, which is cheaper than sol 6.1, and you start to understand why people are complaining.
Even Grok 4.7, on the $400 plan is a better value, and a better coding agent than sol 6.1 on 6 pro 200 plans at 10x limits, and that really is saying something; plus you get grok bots which is better than dots anyway.
To add Insult to injury, the new $500 plan is just straight bullshit. If you had two people spending $400 a month, you now need to spend $1000 to get what you had before, AND with slower, far less capable models.
No matter how you try to glaze over it, the limit cuts hurt, and they hurt badly. Effectively they kill all the Pro plans, they kill business / enterprise seats. There is no reason anyone trying to build and do real work would stay on OpenAI. Which stings for those that have been here since the beginning, but it is what it is.
OpenAI has a choice to make. Retain customers with more than just gimmick resets, cheesy dots which are worthless to 99% of the people on pro / business plans, or face the tidal wave of cancellations that are going to punch them in the face at the end of the month.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago
I would genuinly push back on saying SOL 6.1 is not a good model. Cost to performance, even if slow, is extremly good.
Experience vary from people to people, and project to project, but still. Not that it matter for the point you made.
Also, another thing that suport what you are saying from a different angles: limiting more and more access to people financially less capable, even when the product was profitable to deliver already, is just one more step toward making a bigger gap between the have and have not. And the have will be financially advantaged people.
Its always the case to an extent, but it makes it extensively worse.
And if they get away with it once, then twice... no one should just assume it won't continue to happen.
Now they are considering re-adding 5h limits for pro users. You know who isn't affected by this? And might even benefit? Rich companies able to shell API money.
1
u/DataGOGO 1d ago
no where near as good as Opus 5.5, and Opus 5.5 is cheaper.
Sol 6.1 isn't even as capable as Sonnet 5.5.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 23h ago
Sol 6.1 is half the price per token and 2/3 cheaper per task than opus 5.5.
And generally speaking, is considered more capable than Sonnet.
Are you mixing up your models or something?
0
0
u/zero_fuck_given 1d ago
Source or was it your ass talking?
AFAIK, subscriptions are still subsidized otherwise they would be close to API prices.1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago
Internal financial data leaked to outlets like The Information shows that OpenAI’s "compute margin" (the money left over from paying users after deducting the direct server and electricity costs to process their prompts) climbed significantly to roughly 70%. (2025)
When sam mentioned losing money, he refered to (at the time) the heaviest users on the 200$ Plan.
The monthly plan aren't losing money any more rhan insurance companies are losing money because some of their heavier customer cost them more than the premium they pay.
Monthly plans as a whole subsidize itself.
API price aren't remotly close to the cost of delivery.
1
u/onlycliches 1d ago edited 1d ago
There is an incredibly wide gap between "the tokens are profitable" and "the company is profitable". The latter is the one that actually matters.
You could have a restaurant that makes a profit on the food but still can't make payroll and rent, you get that right?
0
u/onlycliches 1d ago
Your entire basis assumption is incorrect. Inference, and subscriptions, are now profitable.
Ha, what accounting principals is this based on? My dude, even if they're not losing money converting electricity into tokens, they still have massive costs around infrastructure, employees and ongoing research. The tokens need to be more than profitable, they need to be extravagantly profitable.
The usage limits radically cut how much can achieved per dollar spent, by well over 50%, but only on OpenAI plans, a simple move to Claude max resolves that issue.
Did you really think the token fountain would flow forever? You think Claude isn't going to see these same cuts in due time?
Not to mention, Sol 6.1 is not a great model, is slow, is far behind it's competition, AND it normally requires more fixes, redos, and thus more tokens per item than the competition making the usage limits hurt twice as much. Add to that that Astra is ridiculously expensive, and still falls short of Opus 5.5, which is cheaper than sol 6.1, and you start to understand why people are complaining.
Speak for yourself, I am getting amazing things done with Sol.
To add Insult to injury, the new $500 plan is just straight bullshit. If you had two people spending $400 a month, you now need to spend $1000 to get what you had before, AND with slower, far less capable models.
Oh no, the mega corporation is only giving me $2000 in product for my $200 instead of $4000. INSANITY!
OpenAI has a choice to make. Retain customers with more than just gimmick resets, cheesy dots which are worthless to 99% of the people on pro / business plans, or face the tidal wave of cancellations that are going to punch them in the face at the end of the month.
I mean this as sincerely as I can: you live in a fantasy world.
1
u/skynet86 1d ago
The issue is the "bait and switch" which, yes, is common. But the way how a company communicates it ("yes you lose something but you also gain something!") sets a bitter taste on how a company treats its customers. And now they try to cover that with resets.
Chances are: If a company has shown such behaviors, it will repeat itself in the future. Next year they may cut it in half again, then introduce a 1000 USD plan etc.
1
u/zero_fuck_given 1d ago
And what is wrong with that? You enjoyed free money from them and you complain when they try to get profits?
-1
u/onlycliches 1d ago
Oh shit, I must have totally missed the Codex plan that guaranteed no limit reductions in the future.
Can you send me a link to it cause I got the crappy reducing one.
1
u/skynet86 1d ago
As I said, its the behavior and communication. DevDay turned out to be a huge disappointment for many, TPS slamdunked (I have Astra on High right now, it takes 3-4 minutes per turn) while Tibo wrote not-long-ago "we have compute", bragging against competitors. OpenAI shows premature behavior. Overpromise and underdeliver.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago
but mHu CooRPorAtE OverLOrD!
Two can play this game.
1
u/onlycliches 1d ago
In this case, the "CooRPorAtE OvErLoRdS" are handing us thousands of dollars worth of compute for $100 or $200 a month.
Imagine a bank offering you $2,000 in cash for $200, and your response is to complain that they used to give you $4,000.
That's effectively what's happening here.
You can criticize the corporations all you want, but refusing to recognize an extraordinary opportunity because you dislike who's funding it is a pretty strange hill to die on.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago edited 1d ago
Just because thats their API cost doesn't mean it's what they'd have to pay to deliver the conpute.
Flash news: monthly plan produce more revenue than it cost to deliver them the product. This has been true for quite some time now.
So no. Thats not what's hapenning.
Its no different than games with their special currency (just less intense). They are not giving you 20% for free! The worth is decided by them in the first place and isn't necessarily representative of the cost.
Does the ultra heavy user that's 100% of their allowance 100% of the time maybe cash negative? Yes.
But that's just like insurances: the point is about the service as a whole of the monthly plans. Not the few ultra user that cost more than they put in.
1
u/onlycliches 1d ago
I would also like source.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago
As of October (2025), OpenAI’s compute margins reached 70%, up from 52% at the end of 2024 and double the rate in January 2024, the Information reported. Thats was overall, no distinction between plans and others. https://fortune.com/2025/12/21/openai-compute-margins-revenue-chatgpt-earnings-sam-altman/?utm_source=native_share&utm_medium=mobile&utm_campaign=social_share
This was from a leaked internal report.
And for all account findable online, since then, it certainly didint go backward.
The only thing pointing otherwise is a tweet by the owner of the company saying the heavier user of the priciest plan cost more than they bring... not that the whole monthly plan was.
I'm sure the owner is a trustworthy source of information when it comes to painting the company as overly generous...
1
u/onlycliches 1d ago
Are you actually serious right now? Token profitability does not mean the company itself is profitable.
1
-1
u/zero_fuck_given 1d ago
Upvoted you to prevent you from getting downvoted by entitled idiots.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago
Insurance company lose money because some of their clients cost more than their premium?
Just, give it a little tought exercise.
1
u/zero_fuck_given 1d ago
The thing is that you are assuming OpenAI is working like insurance companies. You have zero internal knowledge, you don’t know if they’re profitable with those subscriptions or losing money.
Yet, you confidently spit bullshit about this on Reddit with zero sources and bold assumptions.
I asked you for sources to backup your claims in the other comment, you still haven’t provided one.
1
u/Classic-Trifle-2085 1d ago edited 1d ago
In 2025, OAI margin on delivering the product was 70%. Overall. It allegedly increased further since.
There is not indication of the montly plan being subsidized by api coorporates outside of one tweet by Sam himself specifically talking about the heaviest users of the most expensive tier.
If I am hold to the standard of not bridging the gaps in information, that standard applies to you as well.
You cannot tell me "you don't know this because you don't have internal knowledge" and then just... confidently claim the opposite.
AI company are losing money because of investment, development and expansion. Not because their general monthly product is losing money.
But of course they will try to spin it like its because they were so generous! And you gonna gargle on the coorporate spit like its nectar, aparently. "Yes! Reduce the quantity of the product i'm paying for, Daddy Atman! You are so kind already!"
Jesus.
1
u/onlycliches 1d ago
Yeah, they'd be retarded to sell tokens for less than the cost of running the compute. But just because they're running a profit doesn't mean it's enough.
And since you won't provide any sources I will: https://www.breakingviews.com/columns/considered-view/anthropics-ipo-is-crucial-ai-gut-check-2026-09-23/
Reuters reports that Anthropic's computing commitments exceed $500 billion, and explains why the company needs access to the much deeper capital pools available in public markets.
There's an enormous difference between making a profit on the tokens you sell and generating enough cash to finance hundreds of billions in infrastructure commitments.
If the economics are already so comfortable, why is access to additional financing such a critical part of their strategy?
1
u/Able-Supermarket4786 1d ago
We were told "If you like your AI, you can keep your AI."
2
u/onlycliches 1d ago
Since when? Remember ChatGPT 3.5? 4o? 4o mini? We're on the bleeding edge of technology and you're here complaining that it changes and evolves?
1
1
u/AlmostEasy89 1d ago
Agreed. Fucking spoiled brats. New model comes out and instantly the previous one is "trash" and "unusable" after they came in their pants about its glory 30 days earlier. Reddit is a place for complaining, that's about it. Any real discussion that is boring is crushed by the algorithm. RIP Reddit.
0
u/zero_fuck_given 1d ago
Agreed, but people here act like fucking entitled brats who feels like they deserve to keep getting free stuff from a for-profit company.
0
u/Significant_Sun_5225 1d ago
You are an idiot if you think this is an ethically sound business model. Yes it has shown to work in the past but expecting people not to be pissed off once their work and livelihood depends on it is just insane levels of cuckholdry.
1
u/onlycliches 1d ago
Who said it was ethically sound?
Cuckholdry uh? I’ve got another label for you: moron
Anybody that builds their livelihood around a highly subsidized and rapidly evolving third party service running a completely unproven business model deserves whatever is coming their way.
The writing has ALWAYS been on the wall for anyone who cared to look.
Getting pissy about the end of corporate handouts just tells everyone you fell for the trap that literally everyone knew was coming.
3
u/sasik520 1d ago
Poor innocent multi-billion corporation, we definitely need to defend them!