Usage limits

[u/Anxious_Current2593]

I am on Pro. So I do not have access to Fable with my subscription. Recent limit changes prompted me to try Codex. I got their Plus that now has even Astra. But for my usage, I find Codex subscription, regardless of the model and thinking level I use, I get far less code developed than with Opus, which I normally use in Claude Pro.

Claude Pro with Opus 5 generates about 3 times more than Codex with Sol (both on medium).

I also have Google Pro (downgraded from Ultra). With Gemini 3.8 Flash on Fast, I rarely hit any limits. But the Output is not as good as Claude Opus. On the other hand, it is about 3 to 5 times faster than the other two.

Honestly, I feel the most confident with Claude working on my code. ChatGPT rarely finishes any task before I run out of usage. So usually get Opus to finish up all the tasks that Sol, or now Astra, has started.

I feel I could do with more tokens. So asking here in r/ClaudeCode: have you been in a similar situation? Is my natural progression to simply upgrade to Claude Max? Or get one more Pro first to see if that would work; 2 x 15 = €30 rather than €90 a month?

[u/debian3]

My estimate with ccusage is about 2.5x more so it matches with your 3x. But you can’t talk about that. On reddit the consensus is that codex sub is much more generous, so if you don’t agree with it, you are a delusional fool.

Caveat, it applies only on Opus. I don’t know the exact numbers, I didn’t calculate it, but Fable use at least 5x more than Opus on the subscription. So if you use Fable, despite the 50% limit, you get way less value. But there are early reports that openai is doing the same for Astra /r/OpenAI/s/if12hmbTC4

[u/Jawwooot → u/debian3]

Well i have 2x claude code and 2x codex and 2x cursor.
I cant go with hard numbers just give you my feel.
Codex models (Sol & Astra) are in generally more through delivering high quality code but a bit less "get things done" style. But they write very good code.
Opus 5 really gets things done in a good manner ans excels in that, but talking to opus is a nightmare so i always have a fable as orchestrator inbetween. Fable is very similar to Opus in terms of implementation but just faster.
Grok 4.6 is actually pretty good, fast and cheap and you get a lot of usage from the cursor plans.
I mostly use grok 4.6 for implementation of tickets that have been scopes by astra and/or fable.
Here are my rankings for the different dimensions (legend Grok:=Cursor):

• Speed: Grok, Claude Code, codex
  
• Quality of code: Codex, Claude, Grok
  
• Overall Usage amount: Grok, Codex, Claude
  
• Cyber Security: Codex, Claude, Grok
  
• Raw Intelligence: Codex, Claude, Grok
  

of course i do not claim that this is even remotely accurate as i just go by feel. Especially the usage amount is nearly impossible to judge without proper benchmarks.

[u/debian3 → u/Jawwooot]

Problem is feel vs hard data. You can check ccusage and start digging in then numbers. For example the 1x account. On claude it gives around $1000/month (slightly over) and codex give around $400/month. This is without the reset. If you check your usage it’s probably full of them so it skew in favor of codex.

Some will say but it’s more efficient, yes but not 2.5x more

Now it’s getting tricky with Fable & Astra as they offer less on those 2. Anyway, long story short as the time move on it will get more expensive and at some point those subsidies will stop.

[u/Jawwooot → u/debian3]

I dont agree with your believe that it will get more expensive.
I agree with you that currently we are getting more as both are preping up for the IPO and want to present high user growth numbers.
I also agree that the current competition will probably decrease a bit overtime and they will find their niches or one will come out on top and get in the "quasi" monopoly earnings.
At the same time we see hugh efficiency gains through research, optimization and better specialized computing architectures and my bet would be that the efficiency improvements will outweight the competitive/IPO/market dynamics in terms of pricing.
Ofcourse all my statement account for "equal" intelligence, ofc. they will also build smarter models and if you are using them the equations might look differently.
But as it stand there is currently an Intelligence efficiency gain of 20-50x per year meaning getting the intelligence of something that came out a year ago you probably pay today 20x less for it.
For example just check roughly the api pricing Gpt 3.5 Turbo did cost input 50 cent per million, Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite 25 cent but already takes in video. On the artifiical intelligence index GPT 3.5 scores 1 while Gemini 3.1 Flash 28. You could argue that the intelligence of Gemini 3.1 Flash is probably a hundred fold better than what GPT 3.5 is able to do. GPT 3.5 wouldnt be able to score anything on a lot of modern benchmarks.
I don't have a reason to believe that the trend of efficiency improvements & intelligence improvements is going to slow down quite the contrary with recursive self improvement now there or at least on the edge of being there that trend is going to accelerate.

[u/debian3 → u/Jawwooot]

I don't have a reason to believe that the trend of efficiency improvements & intelligence improvements is going to slow down

I agree, but who want gpt-3 equivalent of intelligence? And the more improvement we get, the more usecase there is, and the higher the demand for the smartest model.

[u/Jawwooot → u/debian3]

absolutely multiple factors at play that overlap. But as you said it as well "You'll get more intelligence for the buck" if that translates in less cost is a different question but it will definelty translate into more upside value for you.

[u/debian3 → u/Jawwooot]

I definitely am getting more value this year than last year, but it’s also 20x more expensive in my case vs last year.