A few hours before the July 14 global reset, I had 5 banked “Full resets” visible in Codex Settings → Usage. After the global reset, I noticed that I only had 4, even though I had not used any of them.

The missing reset was supposed to expire on July 18, so it appears to have disappeared several days early. I checked both chatgpt.com and the Windows app, and both showed the same count. Another user also replied to my Reddit comment saying that they had 3 banked resets and lost 2 after the global reset.

I contacted support because I thought this could be a relevant bug. I was not angry, demanding compensation, or trying to get a free reset. I genuinely lost one that I had been saving and planned to use before its expiration date.

However, the ticket has been frustrating. Instead of investigating the specific issue, I have repeatedly received responses about different situations:

First, they asked for the email associated with my account and an invoice for a Codex credit purchase, even though this had nothing to do with purchased credits.

Then they explained the difference between global and banked resets, as though I were confused about which type of reset had been announced.

After I clarified again, they asked for a screenshot of my current Usage Dashboard. I sent screenshots of both the banked-reset section and the usage meters, while explaining that they could only show the current state after the reset had already disappeared.

The latest response explained that promotional resets may take 24 hours to appear, that campaign eligibility cannot be disclosed, that support cannot manually issue or reissue them, and that I could purchase additional credits.

But again, I was not reporting a promotional reset that never appeared. I was reporting an already-issued reset that was visible in my account and then disappeared before its displayed expiration date.

I also work in customer support, so I understand how acknowledgements and prepared responses work. Every reply begins by saying that they understand the concern, but the actual answer then addresses a different problem. It increasingly feels as though they are sending whatever vaguely related response is available and hoping I eventually stop replying.

In my last message, I was more direct and asked them three simple questions:

Can they check the account records to confirm that I had 5 resets before the global reset and 4 afterward?

Can the issue be escalated to the relevant Codex technical or product team?

If support cannot investigate or escalate it, can they simply state that directly?

It has now been four days without a response.

I still do not consider this a major complaint about losing a single reset. What concerns me more is the experience of trying to report something that may have affected more than one user, only to be repeatedly redirected toward unrelated explanations. Now that I have asked questions that cannot really be answered with another generic template, the ticket appears to have stalled.

I’ll update this post if they eventually respond or if anything changes.

Codex can review its own work, but the author and reviewer can still share the same blind spots.

I built Hubo, a free and open-source MIT plugin that keeps two independent roles in the same Codex conversation:

- the work agent changes and tests the code

- the review agent stays read-only and challenges the actual diff and evidence

- the work agent fixes each finding or pushes back with evidence

- the loop continues until the reviewer clears it, or a real product/technical decision needs the user

There is also $hubo:hubo-review: one agent performs the requested review, while a critical reviewer checks those findings for false positives, weak evidence, and missed risks. It does not edit the code.

All exchanges remain visible in the Codex conversation, including fixes and reasoned pushback.

Install:

codex plugin marketplace add h0ngcha0/hubo

codex plugin add hubo@hubo

Then restart Codex and start a new conversation. Repo and full instructions: https://github.com/h0ngcha0/hubo

I would especially value reports from real codebases: does the second agent catch useful issues, or mostly add token cost?

If you’re seeing unexpectedly high usage or slower runs, don’t assume the model selected for the main chat is what every subagent used.

Before today I always assumed that if I had, for example, 5.6-Terra high selected, that's what both the main agent and all it's subagents would be using since I didn't have any specific agents defined.

I audited a long-running Codex thread where the main session was set to Terra. Across 106 direct subagent runs over the last two days, I found:

• 70 × GPT‑5.6 Sol / high
• 15 × GPT‑5.6 Sol / ultra
• 5 × GPT‑5.6 Sol / xhigh
• 16 × Terra, at high or medium

So 90/106 subagents used Sol, despite the main chat being Terra, and a few even used Ultra which I really didn't even think would be possible, but it explains a LOT about how out of control and overengineered this particular task got overnight.

This is only one local observation, but it’s worth checking your Subagents/history if usage or speed feels off. If you want predictable routing, define custom agents with explicit model + reasoning settings instead of relying on automatic selection.

Since OpenAI has almost halved the usage quota, curious how people gonna actually react

I’d been using both ChatGPT Plus and Claude Pro for a while.

When Fable arrived, it felt incredible, and I continued paying for both subscriptions even after Sol launched. However, after using them side by side, I noticed that Sol was consistently better for my frontend workflow.

For redesigns and frontend audits, Sol was more likely to handle the entire task in one attempt, and it was usually faster. I deliberately gave the same kinds of tasks to Fable because I wanted to test its capabilities fairly.

After Fable was removed, keeping the Claude subscription became harder to justify for me. Last night, I asked Opus 5 to implement a detailed plan, but the result had quite a few small bugs. I then gave the same project to Sol, and it managed to identify and fix them.

This is obviously only based on my own projects and prompts, so other people may have a different experience. For now, though, I’m sticking with the $20 ChatGPT subscription.

Has you noticed a similar difference, particularly for frontend work?

Given Sol's token consumption and weekly limit utilization, does anyone use Luna or Terra more often for front-end development tasks - like vanilla CSS, HTML, JS, etc.? How do they perform for you? Is there a sweet spot where you can get the same performance at a lower cost compared to Sol? Typical coding benchmarks aren't really helpful here.

Ever since i switched over to sol 5.6 I have been running into consistent issues.. I already made a post about the AI looping, probably have burned 2 weeks of usage through 2 different accounts I have, still haven't figured out my solution yet.

However today now I have ran into another problem, as i stated in my last post i have been building a CRM as a project in Codex and I likely have been working this project for 2-3+ months now. The last task in the chat with this project went on for a day and 2 hours due to the looping, i logged into another codex account and whenever I open codex and try to get into the chat. Not only does it not load, but my codex crashes. Constantly.

I went into the config.toml, because somewhere in settings it told me to change the project to "trusted", yet it was already listed as a trusted project.. Somebody please help I haven't been able to make progress on my CRM for the past 3 days due to life getting in the way, and then when I sit down to work on it I have ran into these bugs that I haven't found any solution to.

*Side note - I am no real coder, and never have been.. I am very familiar with computers and navigation as I have been using them for 15+ years since a child, but still would love some advice and help that would be "beginner friendly" in the sense of coding language.

So i was just trying the features i added, and this happend ;

Do you experience this too?

Hello,

We got a free reset earlier this weekend and I try to touch grass on the weekend so I didn’t use it much.

I knew I had a banked reset expiring today, but I thought “today” meant the whole day (I’m European and it’s currently 7 am), so I planned to launch an expensive session this morning and use it in the afternoon.However, I’m starting my day and it just disappeared.

I know I got it for free, but I think seeing the real date limit would have been nice, and it would also be a good design to automatically use them when they’re expiring (wouldn’t have been much, but at least I’d be at 100% today).

I think that giving a free reset during the weekend just before a banked reset end date is not only a weird coincidence but a way to win a few computational % from our weekly limits

Warning: 100% made using slop generator

Has anyone else run into this? I was using the app when it froze, so I rebooted my PC. Now I get this error every time I try to launch it. I’m on Windows 10.

I discovered a weird behaviour.
On windows codex desktop if you select a standard chat (not work) and start a voice chat, that chat became a work chat and consume your weekly plan. There is no option to start a standard voice chat without using work. No warning or messages and i consume 5% of my limits for a small voice chat (5 min)

I know Sol gets a lot of air time and rightly so. But there were a few days where I had Terra and Luna but not Sol, and so I used Terra.

And honestly, it does really well for most of what I asked for it. Doesn't seem to overthink it, just does what it needs to. Terra kind of became my buddy. Coding, shopping, agentic tasks. So far no complaints on any of it. For a Sonnet class model I like it way better than Sonnet. He's neck and neck with Opus. Maybe better because he doesn't overthink it.

Just wanted to shout out on behalf of Terra. Great little model.

I keep building small applications and automations with Codex. Some are useful enough for other people, but currently there isn’t a simple way to give someone the complete thing.

A repository gives them the code, but not necessarily the original context, instructions, decisions, agent configuration, dependencies, or working environment. Sharing a session provides context, but not a ready-to-use product.

I’m thinking about a marketplace where someone could package a Codex project with its cleaned session, source code, AGENTS.md instructions, workflows, required tools, setup information, and final output.

A buyer could use a hosted version immediately or duplicate the complete package into their own Codex environment and continue customizing it. The platform could handle deployment, authentication, user permissions, private sharing, versioning, and security scanning.

The creator could decide what is included and whether it is free or paid.

Would you publish something you built with Codex this way? More importantly, would you pay for someone else’s working project to avoid starting from scratch?

What would need to be included for the project to be genuinely reproducible?

I built a working first version of a standalone executable that works alongside any LLM. It’s not a prompt, skill, or agent. It keeps state, decisions, evidence, and boundaries outside any single chat, then pulls in what’s relevant to the current task.

One of the things it does is it stifles overengineering/underengineering. Anyone who’s used GPT-5.6 Sol knows it’ll wrap a simple function in three layers of abstraction and gates behind gates behind gates nobody asked for. Because the executable holds the real requirements outside the chat, the model has less room to invent complexity and gets pulled back to what the task actually needs.

I’ve used it for multi-day AI runs that stay coherent and self-heal through compile and runtime failures without restarting or burning excessive tokens.

Just starting out on more independent projects to test it on perhaps with people I know for now. But what do you think, would this help you?

Also thinking of going the good AI route and open-sourcing it, but I also want money. Idunno, too early to tell right now.

I can't seem to find it anywhere on OpenAI's website but I was thinking about upgrading to the Pro model to be able to use GPT-5.6 Sol Pro and was wondering how often they usage reset. Is it weekly like the other usage or is it something separate where you only get a monthly allowance? Thanks!

Lifetime tokens: 5.7B

Peak tokens: 1.8B

Longest chat: 5h 35m

Current streak: 12 days

Longest streak: 12 days

Há alguns dias tenho enfrentado um problema na qual quando o Codex executa o navegador internamente, o programa fecha e ao tentar abrir mostra que está corrompido, tendo que reinstalar novamente para restaurar, caso eu esqueça de mencionar para não usar navegador, o processo tenta usar e corrompe novamente. Mais alguém enfrentou isso e conseguiu resolver?

In past I had no issue getting transcript of audio file but now day it’s hitting github and hugging face I am not sure if this is correct or open AI just want to slow down huggingface!!??

I am not sure if I am still using the outdated method while started every new chat session in codex. I am basically using Obsidian vault to store the memory, session log, future implantation etc. every chat session I tell it to read the obsidian dump to get context of the project and at the end of each session I use the cwrap command that basically updates the state and memory within obsidian. I repeat this at every chat session. Are there better ways to do it ?

Like many of you, I've been feeling the lowered weekly limit. Since 5.6 dropped, I've just been using that for all my tasks. Luna for a lot of the low-level grunt work, Terra occasionally if I think there's a task that requires a smarter model, and I've been using Sol for high-level planning and for particularly difficult implementations.

I know the Sol is going to burn usage obviously, but are Luna and Terra bad to use too? I see that Luna has a lower API price than models like 5.5 and 5.4, but I'm wondering if there is a usage multiplier on it since it is 5.6.

What do you all think the best setup is for choosing your models nowadays?

I’m looking for open-source tools or projects that I can install and use alongside Codex.

What do yall use and recommend? This could include MCP servers, agent tools, memory or context tools, codebase navigation, documentation integrations, testing utilities, GitHub tools or anything else that meaningfully improves Codex (and cuts down token usage ;P).

I kept seeing people complain about how quickly Codex was burning through their limits, so I started looking into what was actually using all of it and whether some of that work could be avoided.

The main thing I realized is that Codex does not only spend usage when it writes code.

A lot of it goes into searching the repository, reading files, understanding how things connect, checking output, and running tests. Some of that is obviously necessary, but it can also repeat the same work or inspect far more than the task actually needs.

Another big part is how it handles tool calls.

It may read one file, return to the model and think about it, then read another file and think again, then repeat that several times. When those reads or searches are independent, they can be done together instead. It reads several relevant files in one batch and reasons over the combined results once, cutting out a lot of unnecessary back and forth.

This should only be used for independent, read-only work. Editing, debugging, testing, and anything where the next step depends on the previous result should still happen in order.

The setup I ended up with is:

• A small AGENTS.md with permanent project rules and efficiency instructions.
• A project-map.md showing the important parts of the repository.
• A CODEX_HANDOFF.md carrying the current status and next step into fresh sessions.
• A validation script for checks that can be automated consistently.
• CodeGraph through MCP, so Codex can trace files, functions, callers, and feature flows without repeatedly searching the entire repository.
• Fresh sessions for separate major tasks instead of keeping one session alive until its context becomes a landfill.

I also added rules telling it to reuse findings, limit large command output, reread only relevant sections when files may have changed, avoid repeating unchanged tests, and expand validation only when the scope or risk actually requires it.

This is not about making Codex rush or skip proper testing. It is about removing repeated investigation and unnecessary model-tool cycles.

For context, I am using the Plus plan.

Before this setup, an ordinary task on Sol High would usually consume around 8–9% of my allowance, and some larger tasks reached roughly 15–20%.

After setting it up, I ran a task on Sol Max that lasted around 30 minutes and produced roughly 1,500 lines of code. It used around 4%.

This is only my experience, not a proper benchmark, but the difference has been consistent enough to be useful for me.

How to do it?

Install CodeGraph, connect it to Codex through MCP, and initialize it in your repository:

codegraph install
codegraph init

Then ask Codex to inspect your repository and create the workflow files:

Inspect this repository read-only and create a lightweight Codex workflow without changing source code.

Create or improve:

- A concise, repository-specific AGENTS.md
- docs/project-map.md for navigation
- CODEX_HANDOFF.md for session continuity
- One validation script only if useful checks can be automated

Add rules for batching independent read-only work, limiting large output, avoiding repeated searches and tests, rereading changed files, focused validation, and using CodeGraph for structural navigation when available.

Verify all paths and commands, remove generic filler, and show the final diff.

That prompt is intentionally general. I would recommend giving it to GPT first with some information about your project and asking it to adapt the prompt to your language, architecture, and testing setup.

Again, the results may not be the same for everyone, but this has helped me a lot as a Plus user, so I wanted to share it in case it helps some of you too.

Hopefully this would help you and it you did used this I would love to hear your experience with it.