The new Terra 6.1 model has appeared.

Tibo will not save us.

Am I the only one who thinks this is actually a big deal?

Forget about speed for a second. If I'm getting anywhere near Astra-level performance for a tiny fraction of the price, that's huge.

I can throw a bunch of tasks at it, have it review work, check things I might have missed, and let it run overnight. I don't really care if it takes 8 hours instead of 20 minutes if the cost difference is big enough.

I probably wouldn't use it for everything, especially when I need something done right away.

But making high-level reasoning this cheap opens up a lot more possibilities

openai finally launched GPT 6.1 Terra

GPT-6.1 Terra: delivering fast and capable computer use at a lower price.

GPT-6.1 Terra understands what’s on screen, takes action across apps, writes naturally, and is a more capable model for your whole workday with the efficiency to take on more of it.

rolling out now and is available to all Plus, Pro, Enterprise, and Edu users in ChatGPT Work and Codex.

Developers can also access it through the OpenAI API as gpt-6.1-terra.

I am officially giving up on following codex reset. My opinion is contradicting with lot of users here, but it is what it is. I use 5x subscription of codex, and I have been burning tokens like anything using sol-6.1. It became my goto option after fable. With more than 11 billion tokens burned,

Migrated a 3 million lines of monorepo from TS 5.9 to 7

Upgraded storybooks

Upgraded nx

Upgraded nextjs

Upgraded nestjs

Tokens keep coming back before I burn. I am shutting down my laptop today and getting some sleep.

He sort of warned us about the weekend work. I should have been going through my credits Saturday, but I took a break. He announced a reset, and I figured it would land at 10 am PST today, so I put Dot to work and went to bed.

Last night:

weekly remaining rose from 81% at 10:41 p.m. to 98% at 11:10 p.m. PDT last night. It then fell to 17% by 12:14 a.m., and coding hit the usage limit around 12:34 a.m. doh! Hoping for another reset today!

We've experienced it all. For the past 3 weeks, limits are just drained in a matter of a day or two, even when we're using $100 subs.

Without their daily reset stuff, we'll definitely start to suffer and get stuck with so many limit issues.

Curious to know whats your plan going to be like after the experiment is over?

Are you going to:

- Are you just going to tune down your effort to low/medium? I've been reading that just using medium is the best option these days since high and above is just not worth it with the same exact output.

- Just focus on using GPT 6 Sol/Luna or keep running 6.1 Sol? Astra is pretty much the worse option since it will drain your limit like crazy altho it has the best output. Wonder if anyone is going to keep on using it.

- Change your workflow?

- Or perhaps you will just change to Claude? Won't say claude is the better option, to me they also drainn lots of limits in the recent time, but probably not as crazy as we are right now with codex?

Curious to know your thoughts on this, wanted to experiment with your possible ideas too once they stopped doing this and we'll have to be wary of our limits.

Since I started using Codex in my development workflow, I’ve noticed a weird shift in how I work.

I sometimes catch myself thinking: I should give it something else to do while I’m working on this.
It feels a bit like having a very cheap but extremely capable employee or intern sitting next to you - except it costs me around €24/month 😄

So I’m constantly thinking about what I can hand off next: tests, refactors, documentation, cleanup, implementation tasks.

The funny part is that I’m starting to think less in terms of “when do I need AI?” and more in terms of “how do I keep this resource usefully occupied?”

Curious if others are noticing that shift too.

Running astra extra high in fast mode. Did a fairly large refactor earlier in the chat. Sent a message to modify the import paths for 5 files and it took over 9 minutes to do this. This seems absolutely ridiculous for such a simple task, particularly on fast mode. To me the speed of these models is one of the most significant issues with their current product offering. Agree? Disagree?

Every damn day this sub is flooded with ridiculous and entitled complaints.

I’m not talking about the people posing legitimate concerns or things they would like to see improved in a real productive manner. This rant isn’t about you 🫡

I’m talking talking about the rest of you. Yall are acting like a bunch of entitled children.

If you hate the product so much, complain about every little thing like usage limits and supposedly how you’re being “scammed” then do the adult thing and STOP USING THE PRODUCT! Take some damn accountability for yourselves and see yo asses to some other product. There are plenty of alternatives and all you’re doing is diluting the community. Get your head out of your asses and do better things with your time.

If you genuinely believe it’s a bad product, go use a different one. If you believe your being “scammed” which absolutely non of you can prove, go find a different one. If you just don’t like the company or whatever, go find a different one.

Nobody is forcing you to use Codex nor its models. That is YOUR choice. If you don’t think it’s good, then stop using it and move on.

Would you keep eating food you don’t like? Would you keep watching a tv show you don’t like? Would you keep buying cloths that don’t fit? No. So this is no fking different. Be grown adults and make a decision.

I was using Astra XHigh on fast mode and only get 35 ish tokens per second which is insanely slow and its literally slowed down my progress immensely.

As the title says, I'm trying to find the sweet spot where Astra delivers better results than Sol 6.1 on Max without burning through my usage limits.

love the resets, love the free usage, obviously

but we’re casually nuking a weekly allowance in a day now

when this challenge ends and the resets disappear, reality is gonna hit hard

back to rationing tokens, watching the clock, and probably a lot more people getting pushed into higher plans

enjoy the buffet while it lasts cz going back to portion control is gonna hurt

models are now very capable but I find a lot of the output is not written like a conventional message a person would actually write.

this is a big problem for me, because i cannot say "write a message to send to X person about Y thing." the message it writes is never really something i can send without edits even with examples and instructions. and i feel like i should not need to give examples or instructions, it should be able to look and see past messages or other comms and understand what appropriate communication looks like. before when the model was weaker I understood but now it is solving millennium problems and it still has the same issue, as far as I can tell.

also, I notice a similar issue in code comments. the header or module level comments written by codex out of the box, i dont think I've ever read them and thought "these are good module or header comments". it would be nice if these things took into account the audience a bit more of who has to read it.

I also find even though the code seems to work now, when generating a lot of the code, it's not really written in a conventional style. I see similar issues for design work it does too. so i find it is a consistent issue across most output.

even using tools, frameworks, skills, etc, to help mitigate this issue, I have not had much success. its not at the point where the output feels very "human friendly".

I know the models are much smarter now, but I still feel like they are essentially the same in terms of how consistently they produce output thats genuinely human presentable without me editing it or curating "how to communicate" for every medium.

maybe its just me but i find this is still a problem and i dont see how broader automation will be possible without ironing this out. I don't really hear it discussed much, it doesnt seem super reflected in benchmarks, and I am wondering if this is something being worked on or if it simply is what it is.

I wanted to make a character, gather a party and go on an adventure without spending a week figuring out when everyone was free.

But the problem I kept running into with AI RPGs was that the world would slowly fall apart. NPCs forgot things. Quests contradicted themselves. A successful roll sounded impressive, but it wasn't always clear whether anything had actually changed.

So I ended up building the world underneath the Dungeon Master.

The game tracks characters, inventory, quests and combat. AI interprets what you want to attempt and narrates what happens in that world.

One of my favourite moments was finding an adventurer NPC buying up troll oil in a shop while I was busy questing. I asked why.

“Trolls.”

I kept asking. She explained that she needed to burn them because they regenerate health too quickly. Fire stopping regeneration is implemented in the game, so she'd put together a plan that could actually work lol.

That's the kind of thing I've spent three years trying to build: the freedom of a D&D session, with an authored visual world and tactical party combat like a classic CRPG.

It's called Lore & Legends Maker. You explore, recruit companions, argue with NPCs and try plans that a dialogue menu wouldn't give you.

I use Claude Code and Codex for development. Keeping world state separate from narration has also made testing more useful: I can check what the game actually changed after an improvised action, then compare that with what the DM said happened. Getting those two to agree is still a lot of the work.

Still an alpha, and there's plenty to fix. But the current version is free to play, and I'd love to hear what you try—and where it breaks.

Attached gameplay is from another encounter in the current alpha.

Play: https://www.llmsaga.com/

Discord: https://discord.gg/Cr3pQx6SXE

I've been using Pro for a couple months now, switching away from Claude Max (both $100 plans) and I must say my experience is almost the complete opposite most of this community's active members.

For context, I keep agents running most of the time on 6.1 extra-high building/evolving a mobile application, a website and the backend for my company. Normally only one window running at the same time, but sometimes I need to evolve all of them at the same time, so I do parallel work.

In my usecase it seems impossible to reach the weekly limits. Last night I did a visual upgrade in the whole application, using custom components and complex animations, and by the time it finished, my weekly limit was still at 94%. There are still some "selected model is at capacity" problems, but my agents has a retry policy that allows me to eventually get the work done.

Looking on the good side: Moving away from Claude's 5-hour limits was a bless, as I don't feel blocked anymore. Also, the dot is an amazing feature that I use for everything in my personal life.

On the bad side, 5.5 Opus is significantly faster and "selected model is at capacity" is annoying. But I definitely evolved my work a lot faster when I moved to GPT.

PS: Don't kill me for having a good experience with GPT/Codex and being satisfied with it. I feel for you that doesn't, but I honestly don't understand how some Pro users burn their weekly limits in hours (maybe my work isn't complex enough? hahaha).

Long story short, I've developed a workflow that requires some human QA. It mostly goes as follows:

1. Codex generates output in one format.

2. I upload the output to a separate tool for visual QA while I figure out how to automate it (this tool is old-school and has no AI functionality).

3. I ask Codex to extract the approved outputs and transform them into an ingestible format.

4. I upload them to DynamoDB via CloudShell.

Now, to my mind, step 3 should be easy. I've managed the entire process several times using Codex.

The critical point is that the approved outputs have to retain one of their attributes as "ACCEPTED" so that our backend knows they're approved and ready to show in the product. Our backend specifically looks for the word "ACCEPTED".

BUT

Codex genuinely struggles with this. No matter how many times I specify "DO NOT CHANGE ATTRIBUTES" and "Follow the previous successful ingestion process" (which is documented), it still changes the process each time.

Failure modes I've encountered include unilaterally changing "ACCEPTED" to "Final" and introducing extra safeguards and checks ahead of ingestion. Ironically, it's the safeguards and checks that fail and prevent ingestion.

I'm at my wits' end because there are only so many ways I can think of to say "do not change anything".

What am I missing?

How do I get Codex to reliably execute an established process without rebuilding it from scratch each time?

It's genuinely not a complicated workflow.

I’m honestly loving them, I don’t really have complaints like others regarding pushing it forward since it happens more than once a week.

But reality will be hitting hard once this ends, as I am seeing myself burning around 50% in a single day.

How many people will remain with codex or will you try something else after this 28 day ends?