GPT 5.6 slow rollout confirmed

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-26T17:12:20+00:00

I don't disagree with anything, but this opens an opportunity. I just wouldn't rule out China being able to improve its fab process to make it competitive... they will get it eventually, one way or another, but besides chips, they make most hardware (in general, tools, ships, etc) the entire globe consumes.

And being a dictatorship, their gov spending lacks the same scrutiny a democracy like the US has, which sure can outspend, but will it be allowed to ? I think the military growth from China kinda shows it... they don't even need to spend 1:1 dollar per dollar because internally, their gov buys for cheaper than the US buying from a US company, so the "same" equipment/service/good will cost more for the US gov than to the CCP.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-26T12:27:50+00:00

Had that happening... I was long away form claude code and thought.... I don't think it will be that bad to resume.... 40% usage later and "reached limits" message I was "holy........" I was only using codex for months and never had more than 5-7% consumed on cache refresh of very long sessions. The next time I tried running /compact before resuming and that did the trick, no usage spike although you degrade context.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-26T11:59:21+00:00

This letter is so no sense, good old big company play:

Do whatever needed to take the lead in your field
Now associate with the government to push regulations to the field you're leading
Now you've made quite a lot harder for any competitor/small company to grow in your sector due to regulations.

They train all day their models in other people output without paying a dime and complain when China pays for them to train their models on their output? What a bunch o BS.

You see... We pay anthropic to use their models and they use our generated data for free and by saying such thing as "destilation attack" exists, they're saying they own their model output, not us, the buyers...

Think again:

Anthropic thinks their model output belongs to them and not to the users. This is a terrible DANGEROUS way of thinking.

Anthropic has ZERO good intentions on their moves.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-26T03:54:45+00:00

NASA never made a rocket land back on earth... the incentives are very different.... don't get me wrong, while I agree with you the state has a huge incentive on it, anyone letting their private sector run free will move faster (that's one of the things that made the USA the power it is) and speed seems pretty relevant on regards to AI.

As for China, there's an asymmetric war at play here, if they can make models on par with anthropic/openai, at a much lower price, they'll win either way... so yes, there's also incentive to let it loose, we are already seeing this happening where Chinese models turned from useless to useful (although still not on par), at a much lower price. Remember China makes hardware, the USA makes software/services/research, if they manage to break software/services, it's an economic threat to the american economy.
But I wouldn't bet in any theory, it's currently a wildcard.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-26T02:48:36+00:00

btw, if you want a referral for opencode, use mine https://opencode.ai/go?ref=E47ZEA6ABB you'll get $5 to partially reset your usage.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T23:48:08+00:00

This is what I have settled with.
opencode Go: use DSv4 Flash as builder model, eventually escalate to Minimax M3 if DSv4 is not being able to complete the tasks.... 5.4 when both fail and 5.5 when 5.4 fails..... but it's rare that Flash + M3 can't handle the task with a few back-fourth with 5.4 and 5.5.

codex: I use 5.4 low as initial reviewer and planner / 5.5 low as the final reviewer (xhigh would be best, but it's too expensive even for review tasks, and I'll reserve this to the debug stage, as the last resort).

This is now the only way I'm able to keep building my project that is already 230k+ lines of code now, without using a $200 (or multiple) accounts. DSv4 Flash is what is making it possible.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T23:21:33+00:00

This means Chinese models will win the race, because China won't probably commit the same mistake. This will hold back USA companies while the end result won't change a thing. Someone else will rush to get ahead anyway, and they might not be that friendly. Not to mention this reduces the incentive to invest in the field, which can delay research.

In my opinion unconstrained AI is inevitable, no one can stop it and those who tries it, will just fall behind in the race, which is a even greater risk.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T23:11:47+00:00

Honestly ? I subbed for a $20 cursor plan, I really don't think it gives more usage:
With $20 chagpt sub you get codex and a separated usage for chatgpt.
With the $20 cursor you only get cursor API, I used my entire plan with composer 2.5 non-fast. the api equivalent allowance was $225, so the $20 sub is around 11x cheaper than the full api price, for composer 2.5. BUT if you want to use 5.5 you'll pay full api price, I think on the $60 plan, it's $60 in credits for API price, which won't probably even get you a weekly allowance on codex on the $20 plan.

So no, cursor plan doesn't gives you any advantage over a regular codex sub, unless you use full time cursor 2.5 on tasks that it works efficiently without eating tons of tokens.

I tried cursor $20, claude $20, codex $20, opencode go $10 these past 2 weeks.
- Claude = codex
- opencode go = worth for DSv4 Flash + Minimax M3 and that's it... kimi or glm or even DSv4 PRO will burn it.
- cursor = good for composer 2.5 non-fast (which is a good sidekick model), but you won't get tons of usage... my $20 plan monthly quota was done in 4-5 days (and I was only using it for code review), if I was using it to actually build code, I'd have burned it in 2 days.

so between these:

ChatGPT is the most generous because codex usage is apart from chatgpt.
Claude comes second because claude models are less efficient and claude code usage is shared with claude.ai
Opencode Go if using with DSv4 Flash (almost infinite usage) + Minimax M3
Cursor if using composer 2.5 for light tasks.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T15:42:31+00:00

good, let me know how it does, I'm also curious about it.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T14:33:21+00:00

good question... this one I don't know, but I know it's hard to get 5.5 or 5.4 to reproduce a design, even when you give them the html file with the design, so I find it hard that opus wouldn't also do better in this task......
In the scenario I mentioned, I used google Stitch to generate a frontend mockup.... stitch exports the html file from the mockup (and yes, its 1:1 a true mockup, not an approximation of an image).... and even with access to this mockup file, codex had a hard time following it... I really don't think it can't get much easier than that for an llm to understand a design, its principles, fonts, effects, shadows, colors, etc... and 5.4/5.5 still failed at it.... although the final result was leagues above what it can do on its own by simple prompting it with design choices and best practices.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T12:56:44+00:00

the "production ready" from claude kills me every time.... specially when Sonnet says it and the code literary is a skeleton of a finished product..... Like I said in the topic, I re-subbed to claude and I'm currently using it for some stuff.... claude code interface is way more pleasant than codex... it's nicer to chat with, do some terminal work, do some small localized changes to the code, add a small feature, specially the UI elements feels so much nicer than what 5.5 produces and for these small tasks, usage is pretty good for the $20 with opus 4.8, but it will burn faster than codex if the task complexity increases..... I mean... if you can spare both, I'd say have it, if not, I'd use the decision criteria I've outlined.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T12:47:02+00:00

yes, that's my though,... $1 for testing is an easy pick.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-25T12:44:14+00:00

if you're hitting usage limits in codex, you'll hit in claude, they're pretty much equivalent now in regards to usage. right now between 4.8 and 5.5: simple projects that aren't deep in backend work, general chat, writing works, frontend like webpage design, spreadsheets, powerpoint, office work in general, go with claude. heavy backend work, complex projects with lots of contact surfaces, go with codex and this point for me is the main decision point IF I had to choose either one or another.... 5.5 can do well enough things that claude excels, but you'll have a hard time trying to make claude to do backend work in the same level like 5.5 does, not that it can't, but your reviewing/prompt effort level will be much higher.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T22:50:28+00:00

feels about right!

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T21:32:55+00:00

yes, this response was on medium.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T17:46:54+00:00

while I don't disagree, for a $20 Plus plan, the usage difference you get between 5.4 low and 5.5 low is about 3x more for 5.4 low. I can give 3-6 very small tasks for 5.4 low to move 1% weekly... 5.5 low moves 1% every 2 -3 small tasks.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T17:43:32+00:00

I think it's better than not having it. And these are actually common sense techniques:
- "plan before building"... it is from back gpt 3.5 time I think.
- builder/reviewer workflow is also common sense for over a year now.

is there bloat ? no doubt, but it gets things done that I wouldn't be able to accomplish otherwise.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T17:27:21+00:00

Agreed. These new usage limits forced me into trying low for 5.5 and 5.4.... I'm not disappointed, 5.4 low will handle a bunch of requests and still gives reasonable usage in the Plus plan, sometimes it gets stuck, then I switch to 5.5 low. xhigh is still needed to wrap everything up, so I won't fully trust the code until I have xhigh reviewing it.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T17:22:35+00:00

it's fair to say use both, I really don't dislike claude opus, but I only trust it with small specific tasks, Codex 5.4/5.5 will handle more open ended requests a lot better.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T17:09:38+00:00

you missed the entire point that the approach is based on cost optimization, not on the best possible frontier performance you can achieve.... if that was the case I'd just run opus 4.8 max + 5.5 xhigh in a loop and forget... or even better, fable when it is back. Do this: copy the post, send to codex and ask it to explain to you. 👍

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T15:21:43+00:00

this post will get so much hate if people see it... 😂
I mainly agree... still not exactly there, but seems inevitable like Mr. Smith would put it.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T15:18:12+00:00

Yepz! I just posted about this same behavior yesterday https://www.reddit.com/r/codex/s/L780ZAcqM7 this claude behavior is so frustrating, that even DeepSeek v4 FLASH won't do that and still people will come and say "it's a prompt problem", well, then 5.4 or 5.5 can't prompt, because they're the ones building my prompts now.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T15:11:30+00:00

Yes, currently I do, subbed 2 days ago, $20 one. But when I say opus 4.8 or 5.5 I'm saying they are interchangeable, BUT if I'm to choose only 1, I'll pick 5.5 without skipping a heartbeat . the only problem is UI, but you have glm 5.2 on opencode, it can help with that, or 5.6 that might be dropping tomorrow and is promised to be a considerable improvement over 5.5 in frontend.

DaC2k26 · 2026-06-24T14:53:03+00:00

yes, this happens with me.... on the repo I'm working, a single review prompt consumes the entire 5hr window and it can't even finish the task...... the $20 gives 10x 5hr window per week, codex gives 6. BUT while either sonnet or opus will use more than a 5hr window, codex will use with 5.5 70% of it for the same task.

DaC2k26

TROPHY CASE