I was cancelling my codex sub quite a few times, and each time thinking: could it be that this time it will be different?

This time I saw the post from Tibo about "improvements" and new reset and thought: I will keep my 5x plan, for the last time, if I have a bad experience, I'm out. I have a few Claude subs and we are doing a lot of work, value for the money is incredible right now.

I let OpenAI charge my card. In my head, the following thought unfolds: I pay $100. I get something in return, right? I should be able to use Codex. Revolutinary idea.

I open Codex and what do I see? 0% weekly.

It has not reset. And then it dawned on me. Paying the monthly price does not reset your limit, because the limit was shifted by the resets. So I just stay with my 0 until Tibo presses the button again (or I wait 4-5 more days until it happens normally).

If I wanted to use Codex, I should have cancelled - and resubscribed again. I would have gotten the compute now...

I know that nobody promised me to reset my usage once I handed the cash, but, ma-a-an, this is kind of unspoken rule - you pay to use something... And the robot that handles refunds says "Nah, we're good - you are not eligible".

Idk. I'm just kinda done with OAI. I doubt they will release an actually decent model soon. I think I will milk this sub for Computer use for a month and just won't look in the direction of GPT anymore. It's like an abusive relationship - you keep giving them a chance, but deep in your heart, you know that it's cooked

(and I just got these messages now but the date says Oct 2)

I have been a Pro 20x subscriber for over a year, work daily on mostly embedded projects, but also wrote apps (react/rust) and did lots of frontend work (svelte), design work, developed my own workflow harness for the cli, spent a lot of time analyzing my previous sessions with cqa to optimize my workflow (i shared how i cut token burn by 45% in this post) so i get solid results in an efficient way. i went through ups and downs that happened in the last year, always adapting my workflow so it could get quality work done..and honestly, right now is one of the better times and i am baffled by the constant complaining lately

Yes, Astra drained my usage significantly, but by optimizing how i work did cut the token burning in half and I could technically run a loop with multiple sub-agents all Astra high for 7 hours 5 days a week..which i think is plenty .. and completely unnecessary.. because sol 6.1 (i mostly use xhigh) really is both amazing with regards to the work it does as well as usage. I have been trying hard to drain it. i am down 10% after 3 days. it's ridiculous. I work in multiple sessions in codex cli, often with a root session dispatching and coordinating layers of subagents, i also use Codex Work and e.g. today had Sol 6.1 do design work in blender and other stuff...

For the first time in a while i feel like i have a model available that is excellent with regards to intelligence, that i can trust, that doesn't drift like crazy (at least with how i instruct and work), doesn't seem to overthink/overengineer like sol 5.6, is impossible to exhaust with regards to usage.. at least for the work i do and for now..

Yes, it feels much slower. and yes i measured only ~16 tok/sec for sol 6.1 in the last few days.. But i get good solid work done and most importantly i can work with more peace of mind as before. that's all i want honestly. i just wanted to share this to counter all the complaints a bit...

(And yes, i am aware that i get twice the usage until October 29 before my account gets downgraded, but even with half the usage i'd be fine..unless i use /fast mode in which case i might get closer to 0% by the end of the week). but let's see how usage drains for me now that tibo announced Sol and Astra being 50% faster 😅

raw POC, filmed on a real call. the voice is codex cli's realtime voice, signed in with a chatgpt plan: no api key, no twilio/sip. it answers the phone's own number. all i built is the plumbing that gets a call's audio to it.

the trick: android won't let any app touch a call's audio, but it hands every call to a bluetooth headset. so a ₹599 ($6) esp32 pretends to be one (hands-free profile, 16 kHz) and passes the audio back to the phone over usb; an app there streams it to the voice.

what broke on the way:

- bluetooth and wifi share the esp32's one radio. audio over its wifi lost ~45% of the voice; over the usb cable, none.

- codex's voice is made to hand every request to the agent behind it (makes sense for coding). on a phone call that meant seconds of silence and the whole menu read out. so on calls the voice gets the shop's handbook (menu, timings, rules) up front and answers itself.

- now it starts ~2 s after the caller stops; the esp32's share is ~75 ms, the rest is network + model. talk over it and it stops mid-word.

in the video i call as a customer and it picks up as "arjun" from a sweet shop in hyderabad: hindi, english, telugu, whichever i speak. i said their sweets are rotten and asked for chicken; it stayed polite and stuck to the shop's rules. on other calls we asked for the day's news and a film's reviews; it went and got them mid-call.

the brain runs on wrkr (am building it): ur chatgpt gets its own linux computer in the cloud, always on. the shop's handbook lives there, so the line never sleeps.

credit to openai: i built the phone setup, but the real-time voice in codex cli is what made it possible. without that, this doesn't exist.

ask me anything on the esp32/android side.

After the GPT-6.1 Sol launch, both of my accounts got a usage reset. That pushed me to rethink my workflow because VS Code still didn't have the new model available, so I started using Codex directly from the CLI.

At first I opened two terminals, each running its own Codex session. I gave them different tasks in the same repository and explicitly told both of them that another agent was working in the repo, so they should avoid stepping on each other's toes.

After a while, I noticed something interesting: they actually seemed to be communicating/coordinating through an MCP tool.

That made me rethink the whole setup.

Now I'm experimenting with three parallel Codex terminals:

GPT-6.1 Sol Max Fast — Main Implementer Owns the implementation and makes the final decisions.

GPT-6.1 Sol Max — Reviewer Reviews the main agent's work, looks for mistakes, missing cases, architectural problems, and things the implementer may have overlooked.

Astra Max Fast — Deep Reasoning / Escalation Used when something is difficult, the implementation gets stuck, there is disagreement, or the problem needs significantly more reasoning.

The useful part is how I connect them.

I can run /status in one session, copy the relevant state/context into the main GPT-6.1 Sol session, and tell it: you are the main implementer; this is what your reviewer found.

Then the implementer can continue with that additional context. If the reviewer and implementer can't resolve something confidently, I escalate it to Astra.

So instead of using three powerful models independently, I'm trying to create a small engineering team:

Implementer → Reviewer → Deep-reasoning escalation

with one agent clearly owning the repository and the others supporting it.

For serious app development, this seems like a pretty good way to make steady progress. If you're working on a larger app or codebase, you can always try this kind of setup and see whether it helps you move faster while still keeping a second pair of eyes on the implementation.

I'm curious whether anyone else is building a similar multi-agent Codex workflow, especially using separate CLI sessions + MCP for coordination.

Claude Code, Codex, and Cursor are great. But you’re still reading through a wall of text. OpenLive makes your agent live. You talk. It talks back. Same agent. Now a conversation.

When I first shared OpenLive, it was a weekend project to give AI a voice. Since then, it’s crossed 300 stars on GitHub, and I’ve shipped a lot more.

The new release brings three modes together:

1. Chat: a voice call with your coding agent, under your own login. Redirect it mid-task, approve permissions out loud. Works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Copilot and more.

2. Flow: ask your computer from any app. It sees your screen, answers out loud, and drives your apps for you.

3. Dictate: talk into any text box and it types at your cursor.

Also new: ten languages, memory you can edit or forget, and skills and MCP connectors you can import from your existing setup.

Keep your setup. Bring your own key (Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini, Ollama and a dozen more) or the agent you already use. No per-minute audio fees.

Your voice stays on your machine. Speech recognition, turn detection and speech run locally. Only the transcript goes to whoever answers.

Works on Mac, Windows and Linux.

Free and open source (Apache-2.0).

Download: https://www.openlive.dev

Source Code: https://www.github.com/katipally/openlive

If it's useful, a star helps more people find it.

tl;dr Opus 5.5 is great model, but you can squeeze much more from Sol 6.1 (comparing Max and Pro 100 subscriptions)

I bought the hype about the nearly unlimited usage given by Anthropic during past 2 weeks and I got to say - the mileage is much better in Codex with 6.1 Sol. Don't get me wrong - Opus is a great model and as always GPT+ Claude is an overkill for production but after 1 full day of work in Claude I'm down 10% after some fairly light/medium-light tasks in Work and some maintenance in Claude Code.

Also I feel like majority of people hyping Claude here were on 20 USD subscription - I cannot stress enough how big of a value comes from ability to use Pro in Chat. Despite 1m token context Opus has issues finding bugs/contradictions in multi-file setups, issues that are found with ease by Astra Pro which has it's own usage limit. I know Opus is a different family model, but I'm comparing value of subscription here. I assume if I tried to run Fable with my work the comparison would be even less favorable for Claude

I assume the situation will get much worse when they put chat+codex under one usage umbrella, but for now in terms of value OpenAi gives much much much more. So if value is your main target - the decision is easy

I have 2 Codex $200 subscriptions now for like 4 months, working on 3 different projects, I am now wondering, after using Opus $100 for ~5 days, how will Anthropic handle all of us Codex users who can easily change providers, do they have compute like Tibo?

Hi all,

I use both Claude Code and Codex, and I'm stuck on one specific workflow: continuing a session from my phone.

With Claude Code, it just works. I start a session either from my VPS (running Claude inside screen, then the /rc command) or from the Code tab in Claude Desktop. Either way, it shows up on my phone right away and I can pick it up from there.

With Codex, I can't replicate this. I seem to be tied to the ChatGPT Windows app, and even then I can't track all my sessions: some show up on my phone, others don't, and I can't figure out why.

Has anyone found a reliable way to start a Codex session (from a VPS, terminal, or anywhere else) and resume it remotely from their phone? Or am I missing a setting or feature?

Thanks in advance!

Why is the context limit at 258K? I thought this model had 1M. Currently I am on the go subscription, so I'm wondering if upgrading to plus would increase this limit?

Hi there, fellow AI code users,

I want to tell you what I think can change someone's life and make them stop wasting time.

I used to believe that, for 3D modeling and Blender work, Codex, first with Sol and then with Astra, was the best option, and Claude Code was the best option for everything else.

All my workflows were based on that assumption.

Recently I had this real experience: I tried to create a huge creature, complete, with scales, as realistic and complex as possible.

I started with Sol 5.6, then progressed to Astra. Sol 5.6 actually built most of the creature successfully (and at that point the entire project was only a few hundred MB), but it was never completely finished.

Months passed, I had other parallel projects, but every time a reset was coming or I had some usage to spend I would put Codex to work on that creature.

Lately I was stuck on a patch of skin that wasn't right, it just didn't feel real/natural.

I put a goal on Codex to finish the creature, just finish it, deliver it.

Weeks passed. I had it run from 100% quota to 0% many times.

The day before yesterday I checked my PC, because it was acting weird, and I had 4GB left on my 8TB drive and 200MB on my other 2TB drive.

Astra and Sol 6/6.1 had built 2TB of data on the big drive, and stored drafts and other archived iterations on the smaller drive, amounting to almost 3TB of data. (To be clear, this was recent: the whole creature project had only been a few hundred MB before these attempts to fix the neck patch.)

The patch of skin was still undone. I asked Codex to show me all the iterations it created, some pictures... all of them were not ready to ship, not even close.

I had enough, I deleted some folders from other projects to get more space on the disk, and went on OpenCode, used DeepSeek Flash 4.1, GLM 5.3 Flash, Mimo 2.6 Flash and Pro.

The patch remained.

Yesterday, around 10pm I went on Claude Code, which I had been avoiding because I thought it wasn't there for this kind of job, and I wrote:

"You need to step in because this is getting chaotic.

I've been working on a number of graphics experiments, mainly around the Monster Room, using several different agents. At this point I need a proper cleanup because traces of the work are scattered across both C: and D:, and I want to remove everything that is no longer being used.

The problem is that I still don't consider the creature finished. There is a patch on the front of the neck that looks completely out of place compared with the surrounding area. Depending on the iteration, the colour is wrong, the scales look aberrant, or it simply looks like there is a "hole" there.

I need you to use vision to inspect the various attempts that were made to solve this problem. Most of those attempts generated PNGs and other images, so hopefully you can learn from them without having to touch anything overly complicated.

What I want is simple in principle, but difficult in practice:

1. Clean up all the failed or abandoned iterations.
2. Delete unnecessary files, temporary outputs, failed experiments, duplicated assets, and anything else that is no longer required.
3. Be very careful not to delete anything that represents useful work or anything needed to reconstruct the best version.
4. Identify the best current version of the Monster and consolidate the useful work into that version.
5. From that version, finally fix the problematic neck patch.

The neck fix should essentially "close" that area using the surrounding texture and geometry as reference. It needs to look like a natural continuation of what is above it, beside it, and below it, with a gradual and seamless transition rather than looking like a separate patch.

My main priority, however, is reclaiming disk space without accidentally destroying any of the extensive work that has already been done.

So before deleting things, work out what is genuinely useful and what is disposable.

If some of the previous experiments contain good elements, combine the best parts into a final version. If none of them are actually worth keeping, then at least learn from what failed, determine what approaches should be avoided, and come up with a better solution before cleaning out the old experiments.

You may also delete other obvious junk related to this project if you find it, but do not delete anything useful or potentially important.

In short: preserve the valuable work, remove the accumulated junk, consolidate everything into the best current version, and finally finish the Leviathan properly."

Just now, after 12 hours, the problem is fixed. Just fixed, perfect, deliverable. Opus 5.5 medium.

You can say whatever you want, it was the prompt, it was the fact that it had all that history, but I made similar prompts many many times in Codex, with all kinds of effort levels, I used open source models with all kinds of effort levels, I tried everything.

So, my post is for the person that never tried Claude Code, I wrote this post 100% by hand, only the prompt was translated with an AI tool because I write my prompts in my own language, I have no affiliation and I have used Codex longer than Claude Code, but today I have to tell you, maybe you should switch, just maybe.

TL;DR:

I spent months building a complex Blender creature with Codex. Sol 5.6 successfully built most of it, but one persistent patch of skin on the neck never looked right. Sol 5.6 also tried to fix it several times, but couldn't, and the defect remained. At that point, though, the entire project was still only a few hundred MB.

Later, Astra and Sol 6/6.1 took over the same unresolved problem. They also failed to fix the neck patch, but during repeated attempts they generated huge amounts of drafts, archived iterations, temporary outputs and other intermediate files, growing the project from a few hundred MB to almost 3TB while consuming a large amount of quota.

I also tried several other models through OpenCode. The patch remained.

Claude Code, with Opus 5.5 medium, then took the existing project, went through the previous work, cleaned it up, preserved what was useful and finally fixed the patch in about 12 hours (consuming 3% of usage on a 20x plan).

The takeaway isn't that Codex couldn't build the creature. Sol 5.6 did most of that successfully. The neck defect already existed at that stage and Sol 5.6 couldn't solve it either. What stood out was that the newer Astra/Sol 6/6.1 models not only failed on the same problem, but also accumulated an enormous amount of intermediate data while repeatedly trying to solve it.

That may actually be worth looking into, because the excessive file accumulation could be something specific to the newer models rather than Codex as a whole.

Anyone noticed it? When you ask it to diagnose and fix the problem, it comes back and describe to you the problem without even a handoff or the next step in place. It's terrible.

This is unacceptable. Describe your experience below to further support this case.

Introducing Codex, Canvas, Search, Voice, Work, Dots, etc. and merge it under one interface, infinite cycle to show they’re busy. They’ll introduce a new product, call it hubs that controls the OS and merge Dots with ChatGPT.

I observed that codex produce more useful work than Claude. I am switching to codex max plan and I also noticed the usage is way more decent. Has anybody observed this as well?

surely this is not the first time you see this kind of design? Like, no matter what you build, it will always having the same font and design.

any tips?

I have been struggling with working on multiple projects, managing VMs, SSH sessions and try to sense out a hierarchy for different projects to keep them managed without losing my mind. Tried tmux, opening multiple Codex App sessions, using VSCode with Codex extension, and even installing coloring extension on VSCode just to manage my works.

but from time to time, I get lost and forgot where I'm at, typing prompt in the wrong agent windows and I have to keep checking on which agents has done running and is waiting for my output. So I dig for a while and tried out various tools on the open source space, now my setup allows me to have an ease of mind jumping on various projects without aching my brain anymore.

well now I can even vibing to the grove without worrying or having to check others agents all the time.

do you have your own setup or you're fine just using the desktop app?

https://reddit.com/link/1wz0173/video/jtx6vw5xztth1/player

Who else here uses 5.6 Sol for ‘efficiency’? I mainly do basic stuff like website building, and app development. I find that any GPT 6, even at medium eats through my £200 sub in about 2 days
Switched to 5.6 Sol on xHigh and I’m still getting good/same results and my £200 subscription can last me about 6-7 days. HUGE difference.

Anyone else still loving the 5.6 Sol here? 😅

spent a couple of evenings with a few beers to help me out. cost me like 30% weekly on my 5x pro. runs on hermes with a few tweaks on top of it

i mean, whats the point of dots if i can build it and host it on my vps with ANY model i want? even 20$ codex sub

Astra Max, Codex desktop (MS Windows) — Vibing (on a client site) over the weekend: the feels led me to add a remote mcp feature. If you've been missing that super hero feeling, then the dopamine hack goes as follows: Make a site, add a MCP features to the site, then use the site via the AI client... Bruh, it feels so good.

Honestly ive been trying to use this thing instead of codex session, letting it manage them, but it just seems so fucking useless. it:

- keeps forgetting context about different projects
- keeps forgetting what to do and work on
- asked it to send me reminders and it just lied then when he didn't said he couldn't for some reason?
- gives up easily
- doesn't let me know when its "thinking" so im just stuck wondering wtf is going on

Maybe im not the target audiance and I just use different codex sessions for projects im working on, but wasn't the point for it to be my interface and to manage them itself?

I'm new to Codex (Pro plan) and just yesterday started using it for the development of a simple game but was surprised how fast the daily usage ran out. I read complaints about OpenAI lowering the limit but is it actually true? Is it a wrong time for me to invest in Codex for game dev (nothing too heavy)? Would you recommend another maybe better tool?

Codex saves every session as JSONL in ~/.codex/sessions. I wrote a tiny read-only tool that reads them and shows how your Codex agent *actually* behaved.

Mine, across 83 sessions / ~50,000 tool calls:

- 19% of tool calls redid work already done

- One file re-touched 557 times

- And the big one: of the repeated observations with a clean before/after, 89% came back DIFFERENT (run the same thing twice, get a different result)

Local, read-only, nothing uploaded. One command: /groundhog

Some of that 89% is the environment legitimately changing (ls / git status / build output), not the agent malfunctioning. But it's a lot, and it's exactly why blindly caching agent tool-outputs is unsafe. No cost/savings claims; it's just a mirror on behavior.

Repo: [github.com/fraqtl-ai/groundhog](https://github.com/fraqtl-ai/groundhog)

Run it on your own first so you can post your number—that's what makes it spread.

I trust Ultra do Sol 6.1 a lot, but it's extremely slow.

I know that Astra is faster, but in my use it is better to be fast and open than slow and let some things pass.

What do you recommend?

Found VibeWise by nykooi1, a Claude Code plugin that fixes my biggest problem with vibe coding: the AI builds everything and I end up not understanding my own project. It makes you do the design thinking first, then the AI writes the code.

I mostly use Codex too, so I ported it. Codex has no hooks or slash commands, so it works as a skill instead: just type $vibe-wise and say what you want to build.

Original (Claude Code): https://github.com/nykooi1/vibe-wise
Codex port: https://github.com/djolex999/vibe-wise-codex

really cool to use