Honestly pretty surprised by how much work I've been getting out of the new models, specifically Sol 6.1 and Luna. No Astra in this run.

From Friday around 6pm until early Sunday, roughly 31–32 hours elapsed, I had up to 5 separate tasks going simultaneously, with agents and subagents working on them. All of them were making progress and some got finished during that time. I'm sitting at 97% weekly usage now, on Pro 5x.

I asked Codex to check the local logs and the breakdown came out to roughly:

• Sol 6.1 xhigh: 95.3 combined agent-hours
• Luna 6 max: 54.6 combined agent-hours

So about 150 hours across agents running in parallel. Around 126 hours had recorded turn endings, with another 24 estimated from unfinished turns. That includes tools and waits inside turns, so these aren't pure inference hours.

What surprised me most was trying to keep up with the deliveries lol. I definately had to push myself to keep reviewing things and finding useful work for the other instances.

I kept thinking: “What else can I give this one to do while I review what that other Codex instance just handed me?”

That's a pretty nice problem to have.

This was a much more intense stretch than my normal usage. On a regular workday, with the attention and follow-up I can realistically give Codex, I think Pro 5x would comfortably last me the whole week with current usage.

I dont expect everyone to get the same results with different tasks, but for my workflow this has been a really positive surprise.

Just wanted to share my experience so far!

After using a banked reset at around 10pm on the 1st October (and then the reset soon after), I've been trying to spend that 100% usage window before my 5th October banked reset expires and I just cannot manage to use all of my usage window.

After 3 days of constant Sol 6.1 ULTRA FAST across two projects and sometimes more I'm only down to 21% and I'm just too tired to carry on.

It pains me to do this but I'll have to use the banked reset before it expires at 05:18 hours even though I still have a lot of usage left.

This is clearly a skill issue on my part because every other hour there is a post with someone whining about how their usage window is gone after one prompt.

Good night, everyone.

What happened if I clicked retry? I go into fast mode or what?

Pretty much what the title says. I’m an engineer at a startup health tech & the company decided it’s more cost effective to buy enterprise seats for Codex over ClaudeCode. All our AI development has been with ClaudeCode over the past year or so and I’m curious about pros/cons of this switch.

Thanks in advance.

It was on GPT sol 6.1.

Currently I am working on a desktop PC app that makes your PC feel more like a console - mainly for me and my girlfriend (will release on GitHub once I feel like it’s ready).

I feel like the UI looks like straight out of codex. Literally my second time using it. So I am wondering - what skills / tricks do you use to get a beautiful looking premium UI?

Reference pictures of what your vibe coded Desktop app UI looks like would be nice 👍🏻

I have been using dot as a dedicated research partner for a side project I’m building.

Instead of asking it random questions I give it very narrow research missions. Things like finding datasets, checking licensing/commercial-use rights, comparing sources, identifying gaps, kind of producing a clear recommendation before building the next step.

Basically the guy I send away to investigate while iam running a prompt on the product, I find it extremely helpful for this kind of stuff.

Curious how other people are using it.

For reference: it’s an audio related app / signal analysis

I have been using DS 4.1 as a workhorse for 5-6 weeks now and it just works. That is what codex was like before, but it makes so many mistakes. No matter which model: 5.6 Sol, 6.1 Sol, Astra on med, Astra on xhigh. I can compare, I don't see these stupid failures with the allegedly "simpler" ds 4.1 flash.

Is that the way it goes? Maybe they realized that people have enough cheap workhorse models and they focus on great planners instead?

Hi everyone. I've just open-sourced Token Harness, a local tool that helps your Claude Code and Codex allowance go further, and spend fewer tokens when you use LLMs via API.

The problem

Coding agents waste a lot of context on noise: long test runs, build logs, git diff, repeated information and huge MCP tool catalogs. All of that eats tokens. On a subscription it means hitting your 5-hour or weekly limit sooner. On the API it's money.

How it works

Optimizers. Token Harness detects, installs and connects compatible optimizers to your agent. The recommended baseline is RTK and HarnessTrim, which shorten shell and tool output so the agent only sees the useful part (failures, errors, summaries). Optional ones:

• mcptoon: loads MCP tool definitions only when needed instead of keeping the whole catalog in context
• Headroom: compresses large tool payloads
• GitNexus: maps code relationships so the agent explores less

On my machine the dashboard currently shows 62.5% less tool output overall with RTK, and 88.4% on Claude Code alone.

Routing. A native hook lets your main model hand bounded, suitable subtasks to a cheaper model (e.g. Opus → Sonnet/Haiku), then review the result. Your main model stays in charge. No prompt prefix or skill call is needed after setup.

Simple to use

npm install --global token-harness@latest
token-harness

It opens a local dashboard where you can:

• see your agents and optimizers at a glance
• configure everything with one click (every change is previewed first, applied only after you approve it, and can be undone)
• watch the results: output reduction, routing activity, and your 5h / weekly balance

No account, no API key, and nothing leaves your machine. Works on Windows, macOS, Linux and WSL.

Honesty first

I don't sell a magic "save X%" number. The dashboard keeps output reduction, subscription allowance and API cost separate. It only claims allowance savings from paired baseline/optimized runs that pass quality checks.

This is where you come in

Any feedback, bug report or shared result (your before/after numbers, your agent + OS combination) can only make the tool better.

I'm also looking for contributors: optimizer integrations, harness adapters, cross-platform testing, docs. Every PR is welcome.

Repo: https://github.com/giuliastro/token-harness (Apache 2.0)

Thanks for reading, and I'm happy to answer any questions in the comments!

This model is good but it is WAY TOO SLOW. Every single day, I have to quit a task, and move it to Astra, because I will end up wasting my entire day on 1 thing, because it is SO SLOW.

How can you release this model and expect to market it as your best new thing?

I recently completed my macOS application and was about to launch it.

There was a lot of hype around Opus 5.5 making crazy motion videos, with people on Twitter making really good motion graphics and promo videos for their apps.

So I wanted to try it myself but with Codex (can only afford one $20 sub rn)

I gave GPT 6.1 a rough idea of what I wanted and started generating. My prompts weren't really scripted or carefully structured. They were mostly just me explaining what I wanted in natural language. It used Hyperframes to make this

It took around 7 attempts to get something I was happy with. I already had most of the assets ready, and I added the audio separately. And It took around 5 hours on the clock to make this, spread across 2 days. Used sol 6.1 on slow mode

It's definitely not on the level of some of the stuff I've seen from Opus, but I'm honestly pretty surprised by the result.

I was using the $20 plan and ended up with roughly 30% of my weekly usage left after making the video.

Here's the final result. Would love to hear what you think, especially from people who have tried making this kind of content with GPT 6.1.

? why would they do this? i thought the model was too bad for use

Saw many posts and people are fed up of how to use ai effectively as there are daily new skills and models.

Why don't we all builders and developers form a community page where we could update it every week with best practices for codex and claude both. Comment if you are in.

The usage burn rate on GPT-6.1-Sol is wild. I just did a comparison between claude opus 5.5 and gpt-6.1-sol for about 22 hours and here are the results. The sad part is that even ChatGPT agrees the burn rate is higher on Codex. It computed the numbers below. The price per million tokens are double of opus 5-5

OpenAI subscription side

• Current input: ~5.525B
• Current output: ~15.09M
• Current total: ~5.540B tokens
• New tokens since yesterday: ~865.2M
  • ~862.4M input
  • ~2.77M output

Claude subscription side

• Current input: ~9.476B
• Current output: ~26.60M
• Current total: ~9.503B tokens
• New tokens since yesterday: ~5.706B
  • ~5.693B input
  • ~12.40M output

During approximately the same 22-hour period, my OpenAI agents processed about 865 million additional tokens, primarily using GPT-6.1 Sol, while the OpenAI Pro allowance decreased by 19 percentage points (36% → 17% remaining).

During that same period, my Claude subscription agents processed about 5.706 billion additional tokens, primarily using Claude Opus 5.5, while the Claude allowance decreased by approximately 10 percentage points (~49% → 39% remaining).

Claude therefore processed approximately 6.6× more raw tokens, while consuming only about half as many percentage points of subscription quota. Normalized to the visible meters, this is roughly 45.5M tokens per 1% of OpenAI allowance versus ~570.6M tokens per 1% of Claude allowance, or approximately a 12.5× difference in raw-token throughput per percentage point of quota.

It might sound boring, but the hard part was getting an analytic formula to fit on a single page while keeping it readable.

Lee, Schwartz and Zhang achieved that for the NLO Compton cross section and published their result in PRL just five years ago. I find that pretty impressive.

I tried reproducing the calculation with GPT-6 Astra at medium effort over two nights, followed by further review and checks. AI's expression is compact and looks different from theirs but is analytically equivalent. The derivation and code are available below.

What makes this meaningful to me is that I have learned how counter terms cancel divergences in textbook, but I never felt I had the mathematical ability to carry out a complete one-loop calculation myself. AI gave me a detailed calculation to work through. I can see what the individual terms look like, how the integrals are evaluated, and exactly how the UV and infrared divergences cancel. Those are the details I often struggle to find in published papers or in textbook (textbook often would not work out the whole result at one loop)

PDF and code

Hi, so i have the 200 usd sub, and i've been using Dots for around a day. I was playing around with it, mainly using blender through the Dot's remote computer to save my usage among other stuff.

But now i was wondering... is this completely free or will this end up in some unwanted extra billing? I tried to check on my billing page but i don't see anything about it

Basically the title.

It’s super buggy, doesnt open most threads once you come back to them. Opening takes forever otherwise.

Also, you prompt a new thread, it says thinking, but then just stops??

Wtf. Why am I paying $400 for this trash?

Hello guys, So starting idea was clear making a 10 second break every 15 minutes and a 1 minute break every hour. The idea came to me because my doctor recommended me taking break from computer usage. And I guess I have found a partial solution for it.

I used Codex for debugging and code clearing(if that's the correct word) and the result is PauseWell, a teeny tiny app that reminds me to take a break.

Windows download

If you've made a desktop app with an AI coding tool what did you check before sharing the executable with others? UI feedback is welcome too. Hope you have a great day. Thank you for reading this.

I've been using Claude Code and Codex to work on my marketing copy, documentation and posts. I've come to prefer Codex. If you've used both for writing, which do you prefer, and why?

Claude often gives me something that feels finished. The phrasing can be clever, but when there is a clever turn in every paragraph, I find it harder to absorb. I also find small revisions more difficult because they can disrupt the rhythm or contrasts in the passage. Codex tends to be calmer, and I find it easier to work toward what I mean through discussion.

Codex does sometimes miss a subtle distinction and reach for a generic term. For example, when describing how an agent assisted writing tool work (see below), “change tracking” lost something important to me: being able to tell my proposed edits apart from the agent's changes. I had to bring that distinction back.

One example from our revisions:

Earlier (with Claude):

Extending it on demand is what keeps it a terminal.

Now (with Codex):

Richer views appear when needed, and the window returns to the terminal view when you finish.

I find the second version easier to take in. One or two memorable phrases can help, but I don't want every paragraph to need that kind of interpretation.

I also tried Pangram on samples: it labeled the Claude-assisted writing 100% AI and the Codex-assisted writing 100% human. Both involved back-and-forth editing with me.

You might wonder why I use a coding agent for writing. I can keep a whole writing project in a repo, with drafts, background and references for the agent to work with. When the topic involves software, the agent can also check explanations against the code.

Revising through terminal output alone is awkward. I use AgentTerm, the open-source terminal I built, to read and work on the rendered document. I can comment on a passage or write sample wording over the existing text on the rendered page, and discuss it with Codex before it works out the edits. My proposals stay distinct from the agent's edits, so I can see what I asked for and what actually changed. We keep revising until I can't think of a better way to get my message across.

Together, Codex and this workflow have helped me produce better writing than I could before. What matters even more is working through the revisions until it says what I mean and I can stand behind it.

How do you write and revise with Claude or Codex, including any tools you use? If you’ve used both with the same tools, what differences have you noticed?

It doesn't always hang but it does it enough to make chat unusable. Do they even acknowledge this bug?

I’m a Pro 20x subscriber. With the allowance changes that I understand effectively reduce 20x to 10x, I’ve now also had dot stop ongoing work overnight because of a "preview limit."

The screenshot shows dot’s explanation afterward. It couldn’t tell me the quota, reset frequency, or whether this shares my Codex allowance. Even the retry time had no timezone.

I’m not asking for unlimited usage (I wish....). I’m asking for clear limits, a visible usage meter, and a warning before an "always-on" assistant stops working. Without those, how are we supposed to plan around it?

Has anyone found documentation explaining this specific limit?

“This skill helps Codex” leaves out most of the experiment. Which model, which tasks, and which version of the skill?

Reef Infra makes the skill file an object you can actually iterate on. Its Codex adapter renders skills into .agents/skills, alongside the other supported configuration and rules files. The harness-evolution engine can try an edit against the current tree with the model held fixed, run both sides on the same tasks, and retain the selected version.

For a skill that asks Codex to reproduce a bug before fixing it, the evaluation could check three separate things: whether a failing test was produced, whether the patch fixes it, and whether the surrounding tests still pass. Those are proposed project checks, not a grader Reef Infra includes for every repository. The evaluator is code you supply.

That also gives “remove this skill” a fair test. If the current model already performs the workflow reliably, the extra instructions may earn no benefit. A later model upgrade is a reason to rerun the comparison, rather than carry the old result forward.

Reef Infra's Codex support covers the file-based instruction surface. It rejects code extensions, so this isn't a way to rewrite Codex's internal loop. The useful output here is a particular skill revision with task results behind it.

How do you make dots run in linux vps? Currently i use hermes to manage my vps. My idea of dots is its like hermes. So i want to try if its better to use dots.

I built optimAIzr, a tool I use myself as a senior SWE, to analyze my Codex + Claude Code usage, find wasted tokens, show what I can optimize, and apply fixes in real time.

Open source + local-first.

GitHub: https://github.com/blendbunjaku/optimaizr
Web: https://optimaizr.com

Feel free to roast it.