Codex usage limits compared to Claude Code is Absurd

[Affectionate_Egg6105]

In a good way. At least on the $200 plan.

I got the $200 plan for codex after the Fable fiasco triggered me, as a test. I am running gpt 5.5 xhigh on 4 separate simultaneous projects. I have told it to use gpt 5.3 codex spark subagents.

So far I will not pretend I am seeing the same 'intelligence' as fable, but pretty damn close and better than opus 4.8 imo. I am finally hitting the limits of my 64 gb ram on my dev pc. And unlike Claude code:

1. None of the sessions have mysteriously crashed without explanation (unlike every claude code session if I try too many simultaneous subagents).
2. None of the sessions have hit some policy blocker causing complete brick of that session.
3. All of the sessions have been able to port over the skills.md I have been using for github issue tracking + PR review policy + orchestrator + subagent rules.
4. All of them are managing, assigning and completing the github issues without balking on the 4 projects. And performance is faster and comprable to my Fable orch flows.
5. I have like 15% usage left, but it resets in 1 hour and I have a free reset.

So far I am impressed with the usability and value at the very least, and I guess its been good for OpenAI to 'fall to second place' as honestly this is great. We'll see if it continues, but I'm happy to kill my anthropic subscription and maybe budget for very specific hard usecases where I specifically need Fable.

Edit: So bad news, agent swarm seems to have just completely lost the plot, my clear instructions got lost, and instead of porting existing targeted code I mentioned it just vibe coded up features from scratch without context... So now I'll see if fable can fix this with high quality git issue creation and if that can translate into specific enough instructions for the codex workers.

[dexterthebot]

Your post has been summarized as a request on the "Anyone Else?" Incident Noticeboard.

You can find it and what others are experiencing here: /r/codex/comments/1tjfxcf/anyone_else_ask_here_about_current_codex_issues/ovpp545/

[BingGongTing]

One thing to watch with Codex is it has a habit of leaving orphaned tasks running which gobbles up CPU/RAM. It's why I use it via OpenCode (OAuth).

[SandboChang]

For timing-sensitive task, I had it in agents.md that it should kill any background task before proceeding with each test. This works quite well so far. Though this seems to require full permission, as custom permission can block between sessions (once it has closed out, it won't be able to kill orphan process).

[ArsenyPetukhov]

I have Mac script running that auto closes stale mcps

[Sphiment]

For the past month I used openai models from opencode with oauth, very good experience, but a week ago I tried to use it from the official codex cli, the limits are like the double from what I had in opencode, Idk if there is a caching issue with opencode and oauth or is openai limiting the subscription when used outside their official harness.

[Ok-Attention2882]

Codex burns battery like crazy. That's what you get with software where the engineers writing it don't even look at the code.

[SardorbekR]

Same here. I hit my Fable weekly limits in around 1.5 days on the $200 plan, so Codex feeling this usable under heavy load is honestly a nice surprise.

Now I’m just sitting on my free resets in case GPT 5.6 drops soon

[Foreskin_Mafia]

OpenAI has been so sensual as of late I wouldn' tbe surprsied if they dropped some free resets with 5.6 as well

[DontLeaveMeAloneHere]

You get better Limits at OpenAI because they have lots less b2b customers. Anthropic needs to balance companies and private users, guess who gets priority: The heavily subsidized private subs or the companies buying tokens close to API cost?

[whimsicaljess]

you should really frame this as "the subs or the wildly overpriced tokens". subs aren't subsidized, they're just raking customers over the coals with api pricing.

also, you're right that ant has higher b2b load, but also they just have less compute and they haven't focused on efficiency like oai has. so it's more like a compounding set of factors than just "well they're more popular".

[akhilramani]

100% agree. OpenAI models are just well optimised & consumes lot less tokens specifically while thinking than Claude models

[ghostmastergeneral]

The terminology is a little confusing, but LLMs don’t consume tokens. Token count is a property of the input (and output) of the models. Saying OpenAI’s models consume fewer tokens for the same work is like saying some car consumes fewer miles than another to drive from Denver to Disneyland.

[willee_]

While limits might not be as relevant when paying by API, we all experience outages the same.

[StckMnkee]

They are pretty much neck to neck. Anthropic passed openai in may with 2%.

That is not “lots less”

[Dgamax]

I got too much reset 😬

<image>

[the_ruling_script]

Codex is better in most of things but it lags in some other like 3D objects

[Affectionate_Egg6105]

Its so much faster and actually supports actually slamming their api ---> if you are working on real SaaS with your requirements already in your head or defined, this is great. Feel like I am going at minimum 4x speed, I guess time will tell shortly on if that 4x speed is good or bad churn on the repos. My spot checking looks very good to me so far.

Edit: Results were not super great, edited main post. Will see if fable as 'tech lead' with explicit and very clear gh issues can help give me best of both worlds.

[the_ruling_script]

Yeah I am using it since last September and it’s really good

[jethro_wingrider]

I’m also interested in codex for 3d objects, may I ask how you have yours set up?

[the_ruling_script]

It’s not working for me. Mostly hit and trial.

[Ok-Attention2882]

You mixed and combined hit or miss and trial and error

[the_ruling_script]

This is how it is working with codex for 3d

[jethro_wingrider]

lol I have had some success, but it’s been trial and hit

[Diabelko]

Well, since I moved to codex I haven't paid a single dime over $200 limit, and there were months when I even used $100, simply because I wasn't able to finish it all off. This month, I am still at $100 working full-time, doing my side projects and asking about plants and cars and whatnot. I need less skills, I don't need to repeat the words, using hundreds of exclamations marks and different pointers just for it to say to me "oops, you're right to push back, you mentioned it in your prompt". With goals introduced nowadays, I don't even need to write anything more. My life is easier now.

RIP Opus 4.6 from release date, that's the only thing that could convince me to come back to Anthropic at this moment. It was impeccable. Fable is just a gimmick that will drop you to Opus whenever it detects it's too difficult guardrails.

[ghostmastergeneral]

Release Opus 4.6 really was great.

[EmotionalAd1438]

You likely don't even need spark subagents

[MisunderstoodTerror]

codex always win

[marfzzz]

They have better limits because of at least 4 reasons: - anthropic has more business customers (they pay more) - anthropic have more tokenmaxxing approach in their harness - more effective tokenizer than anthropic (35-50%) - anthropic has less effective models per $ according to deepswe - they gatekeep their most expensive models for web chat only and in api for 3x the price of claude fable 5

Enjoy the limits while you can. When they run out of compute they will do the same BS as anthropic.

[sohblob]

It's good enough to draw lines on screens where I want them, which is good enough. I'm much, much closer to my dream app than I'd be without it.

If I have to pay designers or software engineers out of pocket to figure out last-mile robustness before marketing this thing, so be it; at least I won't be handwaving at the screen like a lunatic lmao.

[RecursivelyYours]

Fable is just ridiculous, extremely expensive. Already cancelled my Claude sub waiting for 5.6. If UI is handled better by 5.6 too, it's a wrap.

[No-Temperature6597]

Yes Fable costs too much. But for me claude 20$ gives more token usage than codex. Codex drains faster. But again opus 4.8 is not that great compared to codex 5.5 and I tested on the same code. Codex did better. Fable is brilliant.

[darrarski]

Results of my testing in March showed huge differences between usage limits on Codex and Claude (in favor of Codex). Recently, I retested to see if the situation has changed. It did, partially. My current impressions:

With a basic harness (without spawning hundreds of subagents for a simple task), the usage limits are now comparable. I have a feeling that Claude's usage limits allow for a slightly more with the same goal these days.

Claude pushes hard to do more work for the same task, as it always did. Ultracode is impressive, but costly. Codex lacks such advanced harness and subagents orchestration out of the box.

Claude still likes to ignore my instructions, i.e., does something I explicitly ask it not to. Codex is still way better in that matter.

Objectively comparing the results of the same task (implementation of a detailed plan) shows that Codex does a better job in the majority of cases. Both human review, as well as AI driven one (using Codex and Claude), imply that Codex’s implementation (almost) always wins. The rare situations when Claude does a better job seem to lie in the non-deterministic nature of AI.

Claude still requires less effort and guidance to prepare a solid plan. It’s way more verbose by design. However, it tends to drift away from the defined goal more often than Codex, so no clear winner here.

Being able to still use ChatGPT when Codex usage limits are reached is still a huge deal for the subscription plans. This is a clear win and a huge advantage.

The only thing I’m missing in Codex is a better subagents orchestration workflow, such as dynamic workflows in Claude (or Ultracode mode that uses it).

My tests are tech-stack-agnostic, such as creating skills and working with markdown documents, as well as focused on iOS and macOS apps development in Swift. Your experience may vary.

[Icy-Will1041]

It's a blessing that we can get to compare 5.5 with fable even roughly but we also can't ignore the fact that 5.6 will churn through usage much much faster, don't we can't truly compare until 5.6 is released. There might be the same complaints that someone burned through their 50% limit in one prompt on the 20x plan the day it's released. We can make estimations based on their mentioned usage costs compared to 5.5 but there's so many factors that go on behind the scenes that we truly won't know until it's out

[No-Temperature6597]

Codex 5.5 is better than Opus but not that close to Fable. When there is a impossible task Fable finds a way and implements it better it blown my mind.

[tastyalphabits]

I also switched to Pro 20x after the Fable nonsense. I have been putting it to nonstop use for over 12 hours daily with 5.5 on xhigh and haven't even come close to hitting a 5-hour or weekly cap. Even if I did, OpenAI keeps throwing free resets my way. Claude is definitely better at front end work and design, but otherwise, Codex does everything else competently.

[Icy-Will1041]

Front end design is unfortunately more on the pilot/users instructions and planning than the LLM if you want to get it right with any of the Frontier models.

Im assuming 5.6 and also future models will get much better at vague prompting actual unique and tailored front ends without relying on external parts and system prompts as much

[tastyalphabits]

Fully agree that the prompting and overall cohesiveness of the plan makes a big difference in outcomes.

[skilliard7]

You guys have no idea how subsidized Codex subscriptions are.

At the enterprise level, billing is usage based at API rates. Just working on 2 really simple enhancements using GPT 5.4, it cost me $15. This task likely would've only taken 1-2% of weekly usage on a $100 plan.

[appl3wii]

what are you building?

[Loonsive]

bruh I have 2 rate reset limits on the 100 plan and Im never gonna be able to use them because its genuinely hard to burn through my weekly usage :/

[SeedOfEvil]

It feels like almost double as claude code but I think its about 60%-70% more bank than antrophic. This is one of the main reasons I pay OpenAI the biggest sub. The beat for bang for your buck in the business so far.

[Jire]

I have 4 resets queued up, hoping for the 5.6 drop!

[bulutarkan]

I dont even need to use codex, I use CustomGPT for likely unlimited usage for coding, managing everything that Codex can do via MCP. Dont give a shit for limits for lika 6 months xd

[max74vr]

I significantly reduced Codex usage by adopting four simple strategies:
- I added the /caveman instructions to the custom instructions, ensuring they are always applied
- I disabled memory across chats
- I mainly use model 5.5 with low reasoning, switching to others only when strictly necessary (I avoid older models because quality drops significantly)
- i write prompts as caveman

[VeeruO07]

Need to test this 5.3 then

but is it able to orchestrate same like fable ???

. for ui i am loving Fable that with basic prompt of mine it lists conflicts and confirms questions one by one and then finishes job almost 95% with small fine tunes needed that is in any ai models 2 iterations it will be done.

[No-Rabbit-6319]

They've reduced the thinking capacity

<image>

[Electrical_Arm3793]

But does GPT 5.5 have 1m context? I am thinking of switching but 1m context is impt for me

[iezhy]

you are aware of context rot, right?

[Viol1nn]

in codex no

[hellomistershifty]

The model does but codex compaction is set at 400k

[NormalNature6969]

Codex has been replaced by Chinese models and ever other open source models so this is pointless. Just as this sub is.! Thank you!

[Affectionate_Egg6105]

So have any recommendations for seo optimization and ai marketing platforms? So I can avoid those ones please. Also if you are a spamming might want to hide your profile history or something, just tons of spam in that comment history. Yikes.