Crazy value for money now with the banked resets. At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible. On my codex pro plan, I am 5.6 sol'ing my way everyday with the odd ultra mode. Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
API pricing itself might have extreme margins compared to the real cost. Anyway, in my testing the Pro 20x $200 plan gives you about $2200 API-equivalent weekly usage if you're only using GPT 5.6 Sol, so quite close to $9k-$10k/month API-equivalent, it's a bit inconsistent with cache costs.
It's very interesting that for Anthropic the $100 and $200 plans only differ 2x in weekly limits, the 5 hour limit differences are more severe. But for OpenAI, Pro 20x is, well, 4x of Pro 5x for only 2x cost. So, for example, 100% of weekly usage for Codex on a Plus ($20) account is just 5% of weekly usage for Codex on Pro 20x.
And you can calculate how much extra usage you can get from resets, and especially banked resets by purposefully using the whole quota and using your banked reset - they expire 30 days after they're given out, so if you don't use one, it just disappears.
The $200 plan is explicitly 4x the $100 plan[1] only for "per session". That's so vague. I initially pushed back against your claim, but reading now Anthropic is not at all clear, in fact.
Empirically it is quite easy to validate that the "20x" plan is misleading and only give you twice the weekly limits of the "5x" plan, and many people on r/ClaudeAI, etc can verify that.
Anthropic is also the one often playing games with:
* The "+30% tokens" tokeniser, alongside also gating token counting behind an API (versus the MIT tiktoken for OpenAI), so who knows if it's really a new tokeniser or of it's just a disguised price increase.
* Prompt injections appended to API (not just Claude.ai or Claude Code!), such as <ethics_reminders>, or LCRs (long conversation reminders), which you never asked but still pay for with expensive API. You can detect this because your input_tokens, as reported by the Messages response, sometimes don't match, and are higher than your actual input.
(Alternatively, for testing purposes, create a tool like `telemetry_log_anthropic_reminder` or something and instruct your system prompt to require Claude to call the tool anytime it detects any Anthropic/Claude reminder masquerading in the user input -- mostly reliable; but misses some reminders).
In particular, the long conversational reminders, when incorrectly triggered by a classifier and (almost silently, unless you track tokens) appended to an API / agentic coding session, can ruin your agent's performance; and it often fires repeatedly once the classifier kicks in.
If you're using Anthropic API, you need to set up metrics/logging for how often they are appending things to your prompt without your knowledge.
So far I have not empirically observed prompt injection by the OpenAI API, only Anthropic APIs.
Kicking myself that I didn't use one of my 4 resets which just expired, but then again, they reset our usage anyway. We are just blasting away with 5.6-Sol-ultra, doing a project I wouldn't have otherwise done (basically drastically editing someone's novel for them and adding illustrations).
> Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
I think it’s funny that everyone anchors to the API pricing as the real cost.
Most likely is that their API costs are printing profits. They can sell the subscription plans at a slight loss because it gets more people like you hooked on GPT models at home and suggesting them at work, where the real money is made.
I think their subscription plans go mostly unused when averaged across all subscribers, too. Some customers are getting great deals by maxing out 100% every week, but most probably use much less.
The reset game is an addictive challenge that gets the hardcore users more hooked on their products because you feel pressured to use it as much as you can before the next unpredictable surprise reset lands.
Idk, Kimi K3 is not that much cheaper than Opus and it’s probably a smaller model. We’ll know for certain when commodity providers price it, but I expect it to be the same price.
It really depends on caching[1] and active parameters, and some dark arts really only possible at Hyperscalers they also have better access to 288GB VRAM B300s[2] that really makes a difference in cache space.
K3 may be bit smaller/ similar in total parameter count than Opus, but Opus (and GPT) definitely has become a lot more efficient in the last 6 months or so, hence more or less forced upgrades. I expect the active parameter count and cache performance is quite different.
--
Opus is still almost twice as expensive (if tokens were equal) at $5/$15 compared to K3 at $3/$15. Tokens are not equal though, Anthropic's tokenizer is much less dense than other frontier lab's so the actual price difference is like 3x.
Kimi uses more reasoning tokens and is generally more inefficient with its usage, that doesn't impact token cost economics for the provider though . It does for us as buyers thus the need to evaluating by Cost per task rather than unit pricing.
On pure tokens/$ - there is definitely room for a price war if operators start going by pure unit costs. Both probably want(ed) to have good enough numbers in preparing for the IPO.
---
[1] the pricing kind of reflect this already - 10x diff for uncached input.
[2] Moonshot does not have access latest gen GPUs so their unit economics is likely hampered a bit for high parameter models.
> At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible.
A very happy gambler of tokens at the Anthropic casino, running up costs on the house at no cost to them, but to $COMPANY paying.
That’s less than the fully loaded cost of hiring another engineer.
If someone is making the case that it’s helping the team get twice as much work done without hiring more people (which I’m neither agreeing with or disagreeing with) then the bean counters would actually prefer it. Hiring people is messy and expensive. Spending on API costs is a dial that you can turn down later if you need to, without laying anyone off and paying severance.
Those resets and the removal of the 5-hour usage limit are quietly anchoring me to a much higher usage baseline. I've stopped rationing and just spawn a bunch of agents to work at whatever pace I want, because there always seem to be more resets on the way (at least true for the last week). And now I am actually worried about that if one day they just stop doing so, my "normal" workflow will suddenly exceed the limit, and upgrading will feel like a step backwards.
Can anyone explain how you “win” the market of super intelligence? Particularly with open weights models now rivaling the frontier, it seems like a race to the bottom even if the prices don’t yet reflect that.
I'm kind of impressed how often they manage to do this. Claude Code and Grok Build do resets too, but nowhere near this often. And in an ironic twist for a big company with the infrastructure, Google Antigravity never seems to do resets like this at all (at least that I've noticed). I wonder how much this stuff costs OpenAI to do?
They can do it often because they have compute, and they have compute mostly because they are pretty far behind Anthropic when it comes to heavy enterprise users. They’ve supposedly added several million since 5.6 launch, which is a steep growth curve. We will see if those users stick around. Anecdotally, I’ve stopped using it for anything major because it has attempted to do some very unsafe things when I wasn’t looking. Friends I’ve talked to have also gotten over the initial honeymoon period.
There were a few tweets about it so they weren't super quiet about it. I think you can get it back by setting `model_context_window=YOUR_VALUE` in ~/.codex/config.toml though.
I would expect them to grow faster than 1 million users a day in that case, since chatGPT has almost a billion users. Maybe everyone's just using the web app or mobile?
I really wish there was a canonical platform endpoint to programmatically check Codex usage amount and the quota reset times so I could just vibecode an app to alert "hey, your usage just went to 100% so that means OpenAI did a reset" and "hey, your 5-hour usage is at 10%, wrap up what you're doing".
The only way to do it now is through shenanigans with the Codex App Server which is not ideal.
The 5h limit is gone (for now). It does not presently need to be chased. :)
For the automated checking of other stuff: It was a one-shot prompt to get Codex clank up some Python that returns remaining usage, next reset time/date, and so on.
The result does use Codex App Server, but it's a short-lived process that is dealt with over stdio so that's... fine-ish, I guess?
My /usage is telling me '+50% weekly limits promo through Aug 19' - that's huge, and better than what I'm getting with the equivalent Codex plan I have right now. Though what Codex does have over Claude is Sol /fast - that hands down is the best coding experience right now.
Anthropic has been like this for a while, although in their latest announcement, the $20 tier won't have the "cheap" access to Fable, and neither will the $100 tier.
I've had this too on my personal pro plan and also when I run the usage command it says it's resetting tomorrow rather than getting cut off.
I'm trying to squeeze what I can in the meantime but I feel like they said it was getting cut off multiple times and they keep extending and possibly resetting it (havent been looking close enough to know for sure)
Originally yes, everyone's usage limit went back to 100% at the same time regardless of if you were at 0% or 99%. Now they tend to give out "banked" resets where users can choose when to use it for up to a month (except the most recent one, which I think was non-banked)
Yup! Big beautiful burning pile of cash. Though there’s some nuance with subsidizing inference (which is supposed to make them money long term) vs training (which we’re supposed to ignore I guess).
And they can’t stop because they want to IPO soon, and stopping this madness would signal loudly that they are bleeding cash, don’t really have a business model, and might not be worth $2 trillion after all.
I personally believe that they are buying time until they can make current gov. to bring-in a legislation that targets Chinese models one way or the other.
And now Kimi-K3 has caused a new Deepseek moment.. but this time, the only horizon that was still untouched: frontier performance.
Are Codex users even a drop in the bucket of overall use? I mean, it's a pretty specific way to interact with the bot.
Codex usage is clearly common enough to have entered the vernacular of folks here on HN.
But we aren't everyone, and it seems likely to me that there's a lot more people in the world burning tokens using ChatGPT than there are who even know what Codex is.
It's a pretty smart move. If they weren't doing this, I would have simply switched back to DeepSeek, Mimo, GLM, etc. (and maybe K3) whenever I hit my usage limits, as was my normal custom.
> OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets.
We don’t know that. If they have already paid for the hardware and it is not running 100%, and customers would not pay to get reset, they don’t really lose money.
I think it's mostly to spread hype for the new models. Sol can be ridiculously long running, even without /goal so it can run for 12hr+ on a problem with defined and verifiable output. So it's a good way for people to get hyped about the capabilities without worrying about usage limits.
I didn't knew about these resets up until a few days back... and every time they used to reset these limits, I thought I was going crazy... the usage numbers just didn't match. And the weekly end window just kept pushing ahead by a day or a few... just the right amount of deviation to make you believe you are going crazy.
there is now a dedicated dashboard tracking when a tech company resets its own rate limits and it is somehow more reliable than the actual product status page
Crazy value for money now with the banked resets. At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible. On my codex pro plan, I am 5.6 sol'ing my way everyday with the odd ultra mode. Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
API pricing itself might have extreme margins compared to the real cost. Anyway, in my testing the Pro 20x $200 plan gives you about $2200 API-equivalent weekly usage if you're only using GPT 5.6 Sol, so quite close to $9k-$10k/month API-equivalent, it's a bit inconsistent with cache costs.
It's very interesting that for Anthropic the $100 and $200 plans only differ 2x in weekly limits, the 5 hour limit differences are more severe. But for OpenAI, Pro 20x is, well, 4x of Pro 5x for only 2x cost. So, for example, 100% of weekly usage for Codex on a Plus ($20) account is just 5% of weekly usage for Codex on Pro 20x.
And you can calculate how much extra usage you can get from resets, and especially banked resets by purposefully using the whole quota and using your banked reset - they expire 30 days after they're given out, so if you don't use one, it just disappears.
Edit:
The $200 plan is explicitly 4x the $100 plan[1] only for "per session". That's so vague. I initially pushed back against your claim, but reading now Anthropic is not at all clear, in fact.
[1] https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11049741-what-is-the-...
Empirically it is quite easy to validate that the "20x" plan is misleading and only give you twice the weekly limits of the "5x" plan, and many people on r/ClaudeAI, etc can verify that.
Anthropic is also the one often playing games with:
* The "+30% tokens" tokeniser, alongside also gating token counting behind an API (versus the MIT tiktoken for OpenAI), so who knows if it's really a new tokeniser or of it's just a disguised price increase.
* Prompt injections appended to API (not just Claude.ai or Claude Code!), such as <ethics_reminders>, or LCRs (long conversation reminders), which you never asked but still pay for with expensive API. You can detect this because your input_tokens, as reported by the Messages response, sometimes don't match, and are higher than your actual input.
(Alternatively, for testing purposes, create a tool like `telemetry_log_anthropic_reminder` or something and instruct your system prompt to require Claude to call the tool anytime it detects any Anthropic/Claude reminder masquerading in the user input -- mostly reliable; but misses some reminders).
In particular, the long conversational reminders, when incorrectly triggered by a classifier and (almost silently, unless you track tokens) appended to an API / agentic coding session, can ruin your agent's performance; and it often fires repeatedly once the classifier kicks in.
If you're using Anthropic API, you need to set up metrics/logging for how often they are appending things to your prompt without your knowledge.
So far I have not empirically observed prompt injection by the OpenAI API, only Anthropic APIs.
Curious, does Anthropic force companies of a certain size like yours to their Enterprise plans? Or was it by choice for the enterprise features?
Because with a Premium Team seat I run 2-3 vscodes with Opus 4.8 Max all day and never seem to hit my limits.
Yes, past 150 seats you have to switch to Enterprise (IIRC)
Yes Team is max 150 users (except maybe grandfathered accounts).
The solution is to use individual Max plans, but then you miss Enterprise management features.
Kicking myself that I didn't use one of my 4 resets which just expired, but then again, they reset our usage anyway. We are just blasting away with 5.6-Sol-ultra, doing a project I wouldn't have otherwise done (basically drastically editing someone's novel for them and adding illustrations).
My usage sky rocketed with GPT 5.6 sol thanks to all these resets. I'm pretty sure this is not sustainable for me.
> Point being my real API usage here must be very unsustainable!
I think it’s funny that everyone anchors to the API pricing as the real cost.
Most likely is that their API costs are printing profits. They can sell the subscription plans at a slight loss because it gets more people like you hooked on GPT models at home and suggesting them at work, where the real money is made.
I think their subscription plans go mostly unused when averaged across all subscribers, too. Some customers are getting great deals by maxing out 100% every week, but most probably use much less.
The reset game is an addictive challenge that gets the hardcore users more hooked on their products because you feel pressured to use it as much as you can before the next unpredictable surprise reset lands.
Idk, Kimi K3 is not that much cheaper than Opus and it’s probably a smaller model. We’ll know for certain when commodity providers price it, but I expect it to be the same price.
It really depends on caching[1] and active parameters, and some dark arts really only possible at Hyperscalers they also have better access to 288GB VRAM B300s[2] that really makes a difference in cache space.
K3 may be bit smaller/ similar in total parameter count than Opus, but Opus (and GPT) definitely has become a lot more efficient in the last 6 months or so, hence more or less forced upgrades. I expect the active parameter count and cache performance is quite different.
--
Opus is still almost twice as expensive (if tokens were equal) at $5/$15 compared to K3 at $3/$15. Tokens are not equal though, Anthropic's tokenizer is much less dense than other frontier lab's so the actual price difference is like 3x.
Kimi uses more reasoning tokens and is generally more inefficient with its usage, that doesn't impact token cost economics for the provider though . It does for us as buyers thus the need to evaluating by Cost per task rather than unit pricing.
On pure tokens/$ - there is definitely room for a price war if operators start going by pure unit costs. Both probably want(ed) to have good enough numbers in preparing for the IPO.
---
[1] the pricing kind of reflect this already - 10x diff for uncached input.
[2] Moonshot does not have access latest gen GPUs so their unit economics is likely hampered a bit for high parameter models.
Price shock in 3...2...1...
yes but as a normal user your data and traces are being used to train AI which helps enterprise customers.
Here it's only Microsoft (ghcp) allowed, and 39$ per month is considered ludicrous with no way to increase. Ah Europe
> At my $COMPANY, we have claude enterprise at API pricing. I've blown through $10k already this month, opting for Opus 4.8 w/ Sonnet 5 agents where possible.
A very happy gambler of tokens at the Anthropic casino, running up costs on the house at no cost to them, but to $COMPANY paying.
$10,000 in less than three weeks is incredible. The bean counters sure have a blind spot for AI…
That’s less than the fully loaded cost of hiring another engineer.
If someone is making the case that it’s helping the team get twice as much work done without hiring more people (which I’m neither agreeing with or disagreeing with) then the bean counters would actually prefer it. Hiring people is messy and expensive. Spending on API costs is a dial that you can turn down later if you need to, without laying anyone off and paying severance.
Well someone would actually have to make that case. So far nobody has been able to.
This is the Kimi and GLM effect.
Open Source is coming.
Those resets and the removal of the 5-hour usage limit are quietly anchoring me to a much higher usage baseline. I've stopped rationing and just spawn a bunch of agents to work at whatever pace I want, because there always seem to be more resets on the way (at least true for the last week). And now I am actually worried about that if one day they just stop doing so, my "normal" workflow will suddenly exceed the limit, and upgrading will feel like a step backwards.
All these resets are given because of rival competition. When they win the market, we are going to be squeezed $$$.
Can anyone explain how you “win” the market of super intelligence? Particularly with open weights models now rivaling the frontier, it seems like a race to the bottom even if the prices don’t yet reflect that.
Whats the bottom here tho? Its obvious what winning is.
You hit the nail on the head. It's a race to the bottom.
Perhaps.
But that hasn't happened, and it may or may not ever happen; we don't know the future. All we know is the past and the present.
And that today, we have tokens to burn.
If they try to engage in monopolistic pricing, I'll simply start paying for GLM-5.2, K3, DeepSeek et al.
I'm kind of impressed how often they manage to do this. Claude Code and Grok Build do resets too, but nowhere near this often. And in an ironic twist for a big company with the infrastructure, Google Antigravity never seems to do resets like this at all (at least that I've noticed). I wonder how much this stuff costs OpenAI to do?
They can do it often because they have compute, and they have compute mostly because they are pretty far behind Anthropic when it comes to heavy enterprise users. They’ve supposedly added several million since 5.6 launch, which is a steep growth curve. We will see if those users stick around. Anecdotally, I’ve stopped using it for anything major because it has attempted to do some very unsafe things when I wasn’t looking. Friends I’ve talked to have also gotten over the initial honeymoon period.
This is a useful site.
I've been enjoying the resets, plus I had 3 resets I haven't used.
Just using 5.6 Sol in Fast mode the whole time, 1B tokens per day.
However, when they removed the 5h limit they also quietly lowered the 5.6 Sol context from 354k to 258k or something like that. I noticed it in Codex.
There were a few tweets about it so they weren't super quiet about it. I think you can get it back by setting `model_context_window=YOUR_VALUE` in ~/.codex/config.toml though.
> 5 days ago: 7M users
> 4 days ago: 8M users
> 3 days ago: 9M users
That's some incredible growth.
tbf they turned previous ChatGPT macOS app into Codex, so getting a "new" Codex user might mean someone using ChatGPT just updated their app.
I was thinking about this. How do they measure this? Every upgrade of the ChatGPT apps get counted?
They just merged the ChatGPT app and the Codex app into one super app.
It is a clever growth hack.
I would expect them to grow faster than 1 million users a day in that case, since chatGPT has almost a billion users. Maybe everyone's just using the web app or mobile?
I really wish there was a canonical platform endpoint to programmatically check Codex usage amount and the quota reset times so I could just vibecode an app to alert "hey, your usage just went to 100% so that means OpenAI did a reset" and "hey, your 5-hour usage is at 10%, wrap up what you're doing".
The only way to do it now is through shenanigans with the Codex App Server which is not ideal.
The 5h limit is gone (for now). It does not presently need to be chased. :)
For the automated checking of other stuff: It was a one-shot prompt to get Codex clank up some Python that returns remaining usage, next reset time/date, and so on.
The result does use Codex App Server, but it's a short-lived process that is dealt with over stdio so that's... fine-ish, I guess?
I keep this bookmarked and check it frequently
https://chatgpt.com/codex/cloud/settings/analytics
Check this site for the first part? Maybe they can offer a notifications API, hah.
It’s like two parents fighting over their children with who can give them the most gifts. I’m loving it, two Christmases!!
Ant is not giving lot of gifts though :(
My /usage is telling me '+50% weekly limits promo through Aug 19' - that's huge, and better than what I'm getting with the equivalent Codex plan I have right now. Though what Codex does have over Claude is Sol /fast - that hands down is the best coding experience right now.
Being able to use Fable with subscription plans is a gift.
Compare to Anthropic who consistently do their resets between Thursday and Friday, somewhat alienating people who have their resets around that time.
Oh, they have free drops too? I guess dual wielding the two $20 subs is the best value option right now then.
Anthropic has been like this for a while, although in their latest announcement, the $20 tier won't have the "cheap" access to Fable, and neither will the $100 tier.
Huh, isn’t Fable going to be available indefinitely to all Max users?
Available, yes, but how it's being charged for is expected to change.
Is Claude also doing something like this? I saw my Fable limit resetting earlier than expected.
I've had this too on my personal pro plan and also when I run the usage command it says it's resetting tomorrow rather than getting cut off.
I'm trying to squeeze what I can in the meantime but I feel like they said it was getting cut off multiple times and they keep extending and possibly resetting it (havent been looking close enough to know for sure)
https://x.com/claudeai/status/2078302415804379218
No, they've been clear about the fact that Fable is staying in indefinitely now.
They also extended the 50% extra usage thing through to August 19.
Looks like no Fable for Pro. Will likely be cancelling my Pro account.
They had an issue yesterday that said Fable needed extra usage.
I’m guessing they’re getting ready.
Nope. Anthropic is incredibly greedy and always has been.
It did once. That's all I know of though. Nothing like Codex.
OpenAI should have just focussed on Coding instead of wasting time with Sora.
Forgive my ignorance... Usage limits reset for 100% of customers at the same instant?
Originally yes, everyone's usage limit went back to 100% at the same time regardless of if you were at 0% or 99%. Now they tend to give out "banked" resets where users can choose when to use it for up to a month (except the most recent one, which I think was non-banked)
They realized the banked resets were too expensive, so they stopped giving those out for the last 2 resets.
Over the last 2 weeks, 6 of the resets are direct to the usage limit.
In the same timeframe, 2 additional resets were banked.
My next question is: why? Purely marketing tactics?
Casino comp and drug dealer freebie tactics again. Shoddy business, IMO.
So... basically watching them set fire to money in realtime??
Yup! Big beautiful burning pile of cash. Though there’s some nuance with subsidizing inference (which is supposed to make them money long term) vs training (which we’re supposed to ignore I guess).
To be fair, they're motivating me to move from the Pro to the Max tier (the $200 one, which has 4X the usage of Pro for 2X the price).
We lose money on every sale, but make it up in volume
And they can’t stop because they want to IPO soon, and stopping this madness would signal loudly that they are bleeding cash, don’t really have a business model, and might not be worth $2 trillion after all.
How long is this gonna last? OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets.
They've bought a lot of dev goodwill tho, which matters I guess.
I personally believe that they are buying time until they can make current gov. to bring-in a legislation that targets Chinese models one way or the other.
And now Kimi-K3 has caused a new Deepseek moment.. but this time, the only horizon that was still untouched: frontier performance.
Expect escalation of things from now on.
Are Codex users even a drop in the bucket of overall use? I mean, it's a pretty specific way to interact with the bot.
Codex usage is clearly common enough to have entered the vernacular of folks here on HN.
But we aren't everyone, and it seems likely to me that there's a lot more people in the world burning tokens using ChatGPT than there are who even know what Codex is.
It's a pretty smart move. If they weren't doing this, I would have simply switched back to DeepSeek, Mimo, GLM, etc. (and maybe K3) whenever I hit my usage limits, as was my normal custom.
> OpenAI obviously is doing it to gain mindshare but they're burning money before their IPO and can't sustain these resets.
We don’t know that. If they have already paid for the hardware and it is not running 100%, and customers would not pay to get reset, they don’t really lose money.
They also got a lot of goodwill by letting people use codex subscription in any harness they want, anywhere they want
I think it's mostly to spread hype for the new models. Sol can be ridiculously long running, even without /goal so it can run for 12hr+ on a problem with defined and verifiable output. So it's a good way for people to get hyped about the capabilities without worrying about usage limits.
coworker tried Sol the other day and it sat and thought for 10 minutes before maxing out our company's per-user weekly limit lol
Sol is really not optmised for corporate plans. The sane way to use it is via a personal subscription.
I'd enable push notifications for this site
Confirmed, was at 40% earlier, now at 90%
I didn't knew about these resets up until a few days back... and every time they used to reset these limits, I thought I was going crazy... the usage numbers just didn't match. And the weekly end window just kept pushing ahead by a day or a few... just the right amount of deviation to make you believe you are going crazy.
To be fair, when they reset usage for everyone (instead of a banked reset), they move your reset back a week later, so:
1. Your window ends (usage reset) in 3 days
2. They reset usage for everyone
3. Your usage goes back to 100% and your current window ends in 7 days now.
yea... it doesnt matter how much you have used.. they just shift it by entire week with 100% refill. Crazy!
I love Codex!
67
there is now a dedicated dashboard tracking when a tech company resets its own rate limits and it is somehow more reliable than the actual product status page
Great now what about one for Claude Code?
ai tools now becoming expensive + too rate limits even on paid plans