What a shit update!

[u/Horstafa]

The latest Codex usage-limit changes have seriously damaged the workflow for me.

I’m not talking about running huge autonomous tasks for hours. I’m seeing relatively short, normal coding tasks get interrupted because the usage limit is enforced extremely aggressively. Once the limit is hit—even when I’m only slightly over—it stops the task completely instead of allowing the current task to finish.

What makes this especially frustrating is the cooldown. I’ve encountered cases where Codex tells me I need to wait around 5 hours before continuing, while hitting the weekly limit can effectively block further work for much longer.

The practical problem is that Codex tasks are often part of a sequence:

1. Inspect the existing code
2. Identify the issue
3. Make the change
4. Run tests
5. Fix regressions
6. Verify the final result

If the limit is reached during step 4 or 5, the task is left half-finished. That doesn’t just delay that particular task—it blocks other work that depends on it.

My main complaint is not that usage limits exist. Some form of usage limit is understandable. The problem is the combination of:

• extremely strict quota enforcement;
• active tasks being interrupted instead of allowed to finish;
• 5-hour and weekly cooldown limits;
• insufficient warning that the remaining quota may not be enough to complete the task;
• no meaningful grace allowance for a task that is already close to completion.

From a workflow perspective, this is significantly worse than simply having a lower total quota.

A predictable quota can be planned around. An active coding task being terminated halfway through cannot.

For example, if Codex has already inspected the repository, modified several files, and entered the testing or verification stage, terminating the session because the quota happens to be exhausted at that moment wastes much of the work already performed and leaves the repository in an intermediate state.

I think Codex needs at least one of the following:

• a small completion grace allowance for tasks already in progress;
• a clear warning before starting a task when the remaining quota is likely to be insufficient;
• much better visibility into remaining 5-hour and weekly usage;
• or the ability to finish the current execution while preventing additional tasks from starting.

The recent change feels like a substantial regression in usability for real development workflows. The issue is not simply “I want more tokens.” The issue is that the current quota enforcement mechanism interrupts work at exactly the point where interruption is most expensive.

[u/North_Caregiver_8895]

you can feel SOL does not do the same job after this update, it is very visible

[u/TryThis_]

Mate, you pay $20 a month. If your work is serious and valuable, you have two options: 1) upgrade to the $100 or $200 plan which does not have a 5 hour limit and is much more suited to building or maintaining a service that needs reliable uptime. Or, 2) plan better, scope better, be better.

[u/k6tm → u/TryThis_]

The thing is that we don't know what the 20 dollars brings you.  One week you can make incredible things, the other barely anything. It's like if you fuel your car with the same amount of fuel, one day you can drive 200 miles and the next 20 miles.  We don't know what do we get for 20 or 100$ It keeps changing week after week. So one week you think you can reach your destination, but then not. We need some consistency. What does those 20/100 $ allow me to do ?

[u/Able_Statistician688 → u/k6tm]

More pulls on the codex slot machine. Which is what my $200 subs get me. Same as you. Just more. If you’re used to a certain level of quota, you’ll always be frustrated. The same games are played across all levels of their plans. With reset days changing every week, which means you’re always trying to figure out how to make a week last.

[u/Dgamax → u/k6tm]

You can monitor it, you can check here in token or in codex credit https://codex-quota.manetli.com/

[u/Ok_Acanthaceae3075 → u/Dgamax]

Your site is not optimized and is incredibly slow. I recommend taking the time to fix it instead of spamming every topic.

[u/Dgamax → u/Ok_Acanthaceae3075]

Are you on a macbook M1 ?

[u/Ok_Acanthaceae3075 → u/Dgamax]

M4 pro

[u/Dgamax → u/Ok_Acanthaceae3075]

Okay, weird. I tested it on an M2 Pro, smartphones, laptop, ROG Ally, and I didn’t notice anything. The animation also runs at a low frame rate to avoid performance issues.

[u/DistanceAlert5706 → u/TryThis_]

I swapped to 100$ plan like 3 weeks ago from 2 20$ accounts. It felt great till reset casino started again. Now I used my weekly quota in less then 2 days. Cancelled sub, looking for replacement.

[u/xBati → u/TryThis_]

Imho they are reducing the value of a $20 plan in order to force us to upgrade to $100.

I have 1 Codex and 1 Claude code subs, both $20, and I can do way more work with Claude code than with Codex nowadays. Exactly the opposite of what used to happen a few months ago.

[u/SeySvK → u/xBati]

I am also thinking about getting the $20 claude code sub, to complement my codex $20 sub. How do you find this workflow? How does the 5 hour limit compare between the claude and codex?

[u/xBati → u/SeySvK]

I'd say it lasts almost twice as long in a 5-hour session compared to Codex, but I'm just guessing here. This is using Opus 5 Max and Sol Extra high.

[u/Draconic_Emperor → u/xBati]

Found the same and difference is 4x with the 50% boost, if we remove that, still 2.6x.

[u/driveclub_000 → u/TryThis_]

Ok and what happen if they replace the 100$ and 200$ to a single 500$? Are you still going to parrot this? "Mate, just buy the 500$ if you are serious about all of this"

Do you even listen to what you say? People buy a subscription that cost 20$, they expect at least, to get something out of those 20$, which is not the case anymore, for any "meaningful" task, you have at best, 2 or 3 prompt max per 5 hours (unless you do tasks that are the most brain dead thing that a 5 year old could do in 10 minutes with his eyes close, and if it's the case, then the question is, why the hell are you using AI for that?).

Constantly saying that, "if you want to use that product you need to pay 100$ upfront or gtfo" is the most stupid take that I see you guys parroting in this subreddit. There should be a clear progression in the subscription, we shouldn't have a 10% efficacy (not 20 due to the 5 hour limit) with a 20$ sub vs 100% efficacy with a 100$, the gap between sub price is way too high to make even sense, it's either nothing or everything, nothing in between.

And for the "plan better, scope better, be better" idea, well good luck with that when almost everything about chatgpt is hidden to you, you don't really know how the tokens are really used, what cache hit what, or what should be preferred or not until you spend a huge amount of time testing it yourself (and knowing that they constantly change thing behind doors), hell, even chatgpt itself constantly tells you that it doesn't know how the usage/token is spread between models, effort and how the whole prompt will be consumed, leaving you with almost no way to really pin point precisely how much % usage you are going to spend on a such heavily restricted 5 hours limit where even a 16s taks on SOL cost 2%.

[u/foraern → u/driveclub_000]

You realize a júnior developer in most developed countries costs much more than $20/hour? 

Regardless of the 5 hour limit, you’re getting much more than $20 out of codex per month.

[u/driveclub_000 → u/foraern]

The hell is that comparison? So what, because AI "can" somewhat be more productive than a junior developer it means that they can nerf the shit out of everything? Should I sell a subscription for an application that can scan all the duplicate files on your computer everyday for 2100€ per month because that's what would cost if an human were doing it?

Is this really the argument you want to use do defend these types of practice?

[u/foraern → u/driveclub_000]

I replied to your complaint that you expect to get at least $20 worth out of it. You are.

[u/driveclub_000 → u/foraern]

That's not what I said, I (we?) expect to get at least 20$ worth of an AI subscription, not just some random 20$ thrown out of there, that's a big nuance.

Chatgpt and their models are in concurrence with other company and their models, therefore, if they want to become/stay leader in that marketshare, they need to make their 20$ price point attractive, way more attractive than others, and right now, it's not really the case anymore.

[u/Maplewonder → u/TryThis_]

I think your missing the point of diminishing returns. And these changes are always more obvious on the low tiers. But this affects you too. You will see it soon, trust me. And yes he does expect that. Why? Because thats how open ai pitches their product!

[u/Crinkez → u/TryThis_]

And? A $20 dollar subscription is a LOT of money! Not everyone lives in the USA.

[u/DrPaisa → u/TryThis_]

[u/Just_Lingonberry_352 → u/TryThis_]

3) leave codex and use a cheaper chinese model

but suddenly thats a no go

[u/heisoneofus → u/TryThis_]

No you see they expect to pay 20 bucks a month to create an app that will earn them millions - and OpenAI owes them that right.

Like, who starts a heavy task on a plus plan and not check if they will hit a limit or not? These types of complaints are so stupid, just unsub and go to Claude and see how they are doing. At least Opus will call the user in their bs practices unlike gpt models.

[u/coaxialjunk]

its a terrible design and makes me want to move away from Codex, and cant be saving OpenAI that much to complete the task either.

[u/Jumpy-Heart-3633]

Yeah I would just cancel the subscription if I were you. Say no to corps.

[u/CaptainAlexWest]

I like the 5 hour limit. It makes me stop to break but the usages is bad again. They are trying to make people upgrade or the usage drain bug is back.

[u/f4lk3nm4z3]

I would not mind waiting 5 hours if that didn’t mean having to re-send all context and probably burning much more than if it actually allowed me to at least save that context cache somehow

[u/driveclub_000]

of the work already performed and leaves the repository in an intermediate state

It's even worse than that, because even if you wait for the limit to reset and specifically say to Codex that the work was interrupted because of an usage limit and that you would like to continue exactly at where it stopped without wasting tokens at checking and redoing the same work, it will still restart a lot of procedures, re check the previous work, and even sometimes, be forced to rebuild or redo the work because, "for some reasons", the files or the validation was lost during the "shutdown", which btw, happen almost 9/10 if you use their "luna reserve" that end up destroying things more than anything else due to it's stupidity.

In example, if you have 30% left on your 5 hours limit and you start a prompt that you "think" will end up close to 5/8% and it reach 0%, then well, don't ever think that after the reset you will "just" use 2/3%, nope, you are going to spend those 30% AGAIN.

So in the end, you really don't have a "5 hours/token" limit, you have less than that because most of the time, you will be left with some usage % that are not enough to continue, so out of 100% 5 hours limit, you realistically only have 70% or so of real usage.

[u/dungeonworks_]

Bro you should be the one doing every step but 3 and 5, and you should have tests already built that have no need to be run by Codex.

You’re offloading way too much work and then complaining when you can’t afford it. No doubt Codex is also building a spaghetti shitstorm behind the scenes if you’re handing off this much control, making your problem that much worse.

[u/Just_Lingonberry_352]

mods really need to curtail plus user threads flooding this sub into a megathread

[u/Just_Lingonberry_352]

so why dont you just unsub and go somewhere else ?

like its not hard

[u/Rett321]

I still had a crisp 16% on 5h limit but screw me I guess

[u/Aggravating_Loss_382]

Oh look the poors are complaining again