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
Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
81–90 of 212 posts
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#82Any 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.
gpt-5.4 is unmatched. Claude is possibly better in web UI tasks, but not much else.
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#83Is this not just about extra credit? So what's included in the subscription doesn't change - just extra credits are now token based instead of message based? (For Plus/Pro)
God every single title I read about AI on this site ends up being a straight up lie.
I think this might also impact how usage is calculated for subscription plans as well, not just overages (using tokens instead of messages for calculating usage). But the message from OpenAI seems vague.
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#84For the past month, I've been claiming that $20/mo codex is the best deal in AI. Now I'm going to have to find the new best deal.
Check out z.ai coder plan. The $27/mo plan is roughly the same usage as the 20x $200 Claude plan. I have both and Claude is a little better, but GLM 5.1 is much better value.
Agreed, I use Z.ai and the usage is fantastic the only temper that recommendation that it's often unreliable. Perhaps a few times per week it's unresponsive. Maybe more often it seems to become flakey.
It's very variable though recently I'm noticing it's more reliable but there was a patch where it was nearly unusable some days.
I guess I won't complain for the price and YMMV.
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does feel like also impact the usage meter for subscription plans?
Usage meter has always been completely opaque anyway. They could (and probably did) shrink the limit whenever they like.
Ostensibly this makes usage meter rate changes more transparent?
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
Already paying for Google photo storage, AI pro for an extra $7 is a steal with anti-gravity.
That's only good for the web based UI. If you want Gemini API access which is what this article is about then you must go the AIStudio route and pricing is API usage based. It does have a free usage tier and new signups can get $300 in free credits for the paid tier so it's I think it's still a good deal, just not as good as using the subscriptions would be.
No? Isn't the article about Codex, which is roughly equivalent to "Gemini CLI" and Google's Antigravity? Google's subscriptions include quotas for both of those, albeit the $20 monthly "Pro" plan has had its "Pro" model quota slashed in the last few weeks. You still get a large number of "Gemini 3 Flash" queries, which has been good enough for the projects I've toyed with in Antigravity.
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are plenty of good models on Openrouter that are very cheap, maybe it's time to experiment with alternatives.
what are some of them?
Can't judge on the quality of the comparison but I'd start from https://arena.ai/leaderboard/code and maybe from OpenRouter's ranking.
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#88Why not just attach a real dollar amount, rather than using "credits"? Well, I know why. I just wanted to be snarky. It's just that trying to hide the actual price is getting a bit old. Just tell me that generating this much code will cost me $10.
Pay 100 Gold or 15 Gems to generate this feature
You joke but as a parent, I’m so sick of the gem packs, etc. they try to push on the kids to obfuscate your actual spend on games in real world money.
And now it feels like the are gamifying the compute we use for work for all the same reasons.
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#89Sounds like a death knell to me. If I recall correctly, Ed Zitron noted in a recent article that one of the horsemen of his AI-pocalypse would be price hikes from providers.
Every time an Ed Zitron article is posted on HN, it is met with a torrent of vitriol and personal attacks. The articles are okay if not overly wordy but I don’t see how the subject matter elicits that strong of a response. At any rate, this observation is not unique to Ed, lots of people have made the same conclusion that the math doesn’t add up from a business profitability perspective.
> The articles are okay if not overly wordy but I don’t see how the subject matter elicits that strong of a response.
Hot take, but really it's more of an observation than a take: We saw this exact response in Blockchain & crypto circles a few years ago. (Though HN wasn't quite as culturally "central" to those)
Economic Bubbles are subject to the Tinkerbell Effect. They exist so long as people exist in them, and collapse when either 1) They become so financially unsustainable as to collapse, having consumed all the money the economy could possibly give them, or 2) People stop believing in the bubble and stop feeding it money.
In this regard, the statement "NTFs are stupid" was not merely ridiculing those who bought them, but a direct attack on the bubble and those invested in it. And this is something the people involved in the bubble understand instinctively, even if they aren't consciously aware of it. (There's a psychological mechanism to that, but it's not relevant)
So consequently, they react aggressively to dissent. They seek to enforce their narrative, because not doing so is a threat to the bubble and their financial interests.
---
AI's not much different to that. It's clearly a bubble to everyone including the AI execs saying it out loud.
And people react aggressively to dissent like Ed's, because if the wider public stops believing in AI's future, the bubble bursts. They'll stop tolerating datacenter construction, they'll sell their Nvidia shares, they'll demand regulators restrict AI.
(And to those who can feel their aggression rising reading this comment. Hi, yes. I see you. If I were wrong, nothing I said would matter. You'd be wasting your time engaging with it, history would simply prove me wrong. But by all means, type up that reply or click that button.)
Re: Codex pricing to align with API token usage, instead of per-message
#90Why not just attach a real dollar amount, rather than using "credits"? Well, I know why. I just wanted to be snarky. It's just that trying to hide the actual price is getting a bit old. Just tell me that generating this much code will cost me $10.
What is snarky about that?
The answer is so that they can charge different prices per credit. If you buy low amounts, they can charge one price. If you buy in bulk, they can offer a discount. The usage is the same, but they can differentiate price per usage to give people more a favorable price if they are better customers.
Is there anything wrong with that?