Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

help.openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 212 posts

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#141

Post by aledalgrande »

lelanthran wrote: post #139
aledalgrande wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really curious about how you use it, because for me it was braindead. I tried tasking it to update my personal workout app and it created so many bugs I had to clean up with Opus or be left with spaghetti. It also keeps asking for confirmation of doing basic things.

> I tried tasking it to update my personal workout app and it created so many bugs I had to clean up with Opus or be left with spaghetti. I find it sad that some people are already at the point where "My only options are to leave it as spaghetti or pay for another LLM to fix it". Already their skills are atrophied.

Or I just don't wanna spend any decision capital on that? There's many apps I would never have been able to do time wise before.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#142

Post by bdangubic »

lelanthran wrote: post #139
aledalgrande wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really curious about how you use it, because for me it was braindead. I tried tasking it to update my personal workout app and it created so many bugs I had to clean up with Opus or be left with spaghetti. It also keeps asking for confirmation of doing basic things.

> I tried tasking it to update my personal workout app and it created so many bugs I had to clean up with Opus or be left with spaghetti. I find it sad that some people are already at the point where "My only options are to leave it as spaghetti or pay for another LLM to fix it". Already their skills are atrophied.

I also don’t think vast majority of SWEs ever had the skill to read and truly comprehend other people’s code and then work dilligently to “fix” it. People will such skills, in my experience, are often highly compensated contractors. every codebase which has survived the test of time has numerous “absolutely do not touch this code, everything will break and no one knows why” part(s) of the codebase…

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#143

Post by qingcharles »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #105
piyh wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already paying for Google photo storage, AI pro for an extra $7 is a steal with anti-gravity.

I bought one of the google AI packages that came with a pile of drive storage and Gemini access. Unfortunately gemini as a coding agent is a steaming useless pile. They have no right selling it, cheap open weight Chinese models are better at this point. It's not stupid it just is incompetent at tool use and makes bad mistakes. It constantly gets itself into weird dysfunctional loops when doing basic things like editi…

Gemini 3.1 is a good coding agent. We've been totally spoiled now. Also, if you use Antigravity you can burn up Opus 4.6 credits off your Goog account instead, before you have to switch to Gem 3.1.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#144

Post by lelanthran »

sdevonoes wrote: post #81
gigatexal wrote: post #66

good. just like the Claude model. getting the pricing to be in line with costs is the only way this remains sustainable.

I would prefer if it actually explodes sooner rather than later

> I would prefer if it actually explodes sooner rather than later

The idea, as far as I can tell from all the pro-AI developers, was that it will never explode, and the performance will continue increasing so the slop they write today doesn't need maintenance, because when that time comes around there will be smarter models that can clean it up.

If the providers are tightening the screws now (and they are all doing it at the same time), it tells me that either:

1. They are out of runway and need to run inference at a profit.

or

2. They think that this is as good as it is going to get, so the best time to tighten the screws is right now.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#145

Post by thejazzman »

HumanOstrich wrote: post #111
liuliu wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a bit insidious that the price hike coincide with the end of 2x promotion, which makes the usage change a bit more obscure.

It's not a price hike, it's actually making it easier to understand relative usage for different models/features.

I have no idea what I’m getting for $200/mo at this point. Maybe that’s on me, idk.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#146

Post by lelanthran »

HumanOstrich wrote: post #113
ccmcarey wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, they buried the lead a bit but this is coming for _all_ users, even pro/plus subscription plans. So you get chatgpt pro/plus benefits, and then effectively $20/$200 in credits for codex

> effectively $20/$200 in credits for codex That's not true. First of all, there's no dollar amount tied to how many credits you get for a subscription. Second, if you look at the prices for bundles of _extra_ credits and then do some math on the Codex rate card, you'll see that there's no way they would work out to be the same or similar.

> First of all, there's no dollar amount tied to how many credits you get for a subscription.

I don't understand what you mean here; their official comms is:

     Customers on existing Plus, Pro and Enterprise/Edu plans should continue to use the legacy rate card. We’ll migrate you to the new rates in the upcoming weeks.
To me, anyway, that means that GP was exactly right - they'll give the $20 subscriptions $20 worth of credits, and the $200 dollars subscriptions $200 worth of credits. That is what the "New Rates" are!

I think it would be more rational to discount a subscription (standard is about 10% in most industries) vs PAYG and agree in principal with your assertion - they haven't specified what the discount is on credits bought in a subscription plan - but there is no indication that they are going to continue allowing thousands of dollars of credits on a $200/m plan.

My guess would be a 10% (or similar) discount if you buy a subscription.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#147

Post by throwatdem12311 »

mike_hearn wrote: post #110
rvnx wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Billions of USD in debt, a business model bleeding cash with no profit in perspective, high-competition environnement, a sub-par product, free-to-use offline models taking off, potential regulatory issues, some investor commitments pulling out... tricky. But let's not cry for the founders, they managed to get away with tons of money. The problem is for the fools holding the bag.

How is it a subpar product? I've been very happy with GPT 5.4 and the Codex CLI tooling, as well as ChatGPT web. I'd say product is one of their strengths.

Will you be as happy when your $1000/mo of inference you’ve been getting for $30/mo is gonna cost $1000/mo?

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#148

Post by throwatdem12311 »

supliminal wrote: post #36

Any takes on how Codex compares to Claude? I mostly use it to run ahead, document, investigate and prep the actual implementation for Claude. Gemini burned me too many times but maybe the situation has improved since.

There basically the same. Codex is better at some things, Claude is better at other things. It’s honestly a wash, just pick the one that gives you a warmer fuzzy feeling in your tummy.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#149

Post by thejazzman »

lelanthran wrote: post #144
sdevonoes wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would prefer if it actually explodes sooner rather than later

> I would prefer if it actually explodes sooner rather than later The idea, as far as I can tell from all the pro-AI developers, was that it will never explode, and the performance will continue increasing so the slop they write today doesn't need maintenance, because when that time comes around there will be smarter models that can clean it up. If the providers are tightening the screws now (and they are all doing i…

They could also do a plan 3 where they discourage others so they can use it to, say, rapidly build many new products but competitors would have to pay a fortune for the same luxury

Just spitballing.

Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message

#150

Post by lelanthran »

purrcat259 wrote: post #51
piyh wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Already paying for Google photo storage, AI pro for an extra $7 is a steal with anti-gravity.

Good luck sticking within limits, I have been burning up my baseline limits insanely fast within a few prompts, a marked change from a few weeks ago. There's a few complaints online about the same happening to multiple users. Otherwise anti-gravity has been great.

I use the free Chat AIs all the time; Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, Mistral.

In the last month they have all clamped down quite heavily. I use to be able to deep-dive into a subject, or fix a small Python project, multiple times per day on the free Web UIs.

Claude, this morning, modified a small Python project for me and that single act exhausted all my free usage for the day. In the past I could do multiple projects per day without issue.

Same with ChatGPT. Gemini at least doesn't go full on "You can use this again at 1100AM", but it does fallback to a model that works very poorly.

Grok and Mistral I don't really use that much, but Grok's coding isn't that bad. The problem is that it is not such a good application for deep-diving a topic, because it will perform a web search before answering anything, making it take long.

Mistral tends to run out of steam very quickly in a conversation. Never tried code on it though.

Post reply on HN