Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- How is 5 hrs being measured and over what time period?by reenorap
- In all of them I've seen it's a window that starts when you haven't been using it in a while and begin work OR when your previous window expired. The window starts with a set number of tokens and cuts you off when they're used, it is fully reset at the end of the window (it's not a sliding window).
When you haven't used any tokens for an extended amount of time it reverts to the point where whenever you send your first token is when the window begins.
- when you send your first message, the timer will start.by gowthamgts12
- This is one of the reasons I’ve built a resident daemon on top a local CC/codex. 5h sessions is a [lazy] way to shift the scaling responsibility onto a user, so they are staying with us for a whileby Gurio
- I dislike this approach. In my opinion it is much useful a 1x/2x billing based on hour like Deepseek does. Being unable to use it at the hours I need it makes me want to remove the service, not upgrading it.by estebarb
- What also sucks is your weekly reset does not also reset your 5 hourly. A bit like a slap in the face..by indigodaddy
- I think it's reasonable for the Plus plans to have this. If you're doing any serious work you should be on the Pro plan. If you're a casual user, 5 hours is more than plenty.by nullbio
- 5h limits are awful. It means it is literally unable to complete a large task.
A better approach if they want to balance the load is having higher usage or lower usage consumption at different times of day.
by redox99 - 5h limit is gone with one prompt with Sol or Astra with high or higher thinking.by nicce
- So use the api? You’re not getting a giant discount for nothing. The 5-hour limit is great for all my personal stuff.by pkulak
- This is very fair. Compared to Claude the Codex limits are much better and smarter model.
- In hindsight, this makes more sense with the release of Astra. The $100/mo is now a more compelling upsell.by minimaxir
- I went another way and signed up for a opencode go subscription on the side.by msh
- Yep, worked on me...
- My goodness, the complaining... Just get all your devs a $200 ChatGPT Pro (20x) plan. Yes, you lose the "team" component, but you gain so much more. And what's $200 against the salary of a good developer? It's absolutely inconsequential, even in far cheaper non-US salary regimes.by ttul
- Session limits are obnoxious and make Codex much less useful for me. I tend to code in spurts when I find some time and the $20 weekly limit was reasonable for my side projects.
I'm now hitting the session limits which means I can either purchase another plan, upgrade, or move off of Codex.
by watty - The equivalent alternative is not "no hourly limits", it's simply less overall weekly allowance for Plus users, or higher prices overall. It's a way to balance a scarce resource, and maybe the least frustrating one?
People have a fair chance to learn resource management in 5 hour chunks, while not being limited to silly models, and burning through all tokens in the first hour of the week. Seems mostly good.
by jstummbillig - Once they capature enough marketshare prices and restrictions are both going to skyrocket. The difference between the subscription usage and API pricing are stark.by CSMastermind
- That's the fever-dream that OpenAI et al is fraudulently marketing to their investors I suspect, yes.
- This would need to be a collusion across most of the providers (which I think is likely to happen) otherwise OpenAI would get ditched for Anthropic or vice versa, depending on who raises the prices more. If it happens across the board then enterprises that can use Chinese models won’t have that many options but to pay up.by KronisLV
- This is interesting to think about. There's so much competition among the frontier labs and from outside via open source it just doesn't seem obvious to me they could maintain elevated pricesby jamesriso
- Where's the moat? You can only truly "capture market share" if there's lock-in and no competition.by andybak
- People should realize by now that they aren't giving out thousands of dollars worth of compute in a $20 subscription out of the goodness of their hearts. The base level plans aren't meant for any kind of serious work beyond the equivalent of Google searches. At best treat it like a trial.by paxys
- The same can be said of the $200 plan.
- Treat it like an economic drug.by cyanydeez
- They must have realised by now what they are selling is addictive. It's pretty normal for drug dealers and the like to give people introductory prices then hike once dependence kicks in.
- Is it not due to the all the user data they are gathering?by kraftman
- I thought it was always about us being the RL. We pay less because they use our usage to train their models.by worldsavior
- Disagree, not for serious work if you're a developer aka requiring loads of iterations tool calls etc. But for other tasks it's relatively fine.by fennecbutt
- The $100 plans are plenty for me to use nearly all day. I'm using between $1500-3000 worth of tokens a month via those plans.
I definitely see the pricing model. I can afford $100, maybe $200, but not $3000.
by leros