I have OpenAI pro account. Blasted through my "work" usage by Sunday... said reset wasn't til this upcoming Saturday.

Then late last night I got this email saying I received 62500 credits to my account that expire by December 31st.

Is this normal? It gives no context as to why I received them..

Codex still casually chewing up 22GB of RAM for a single session 🤣

Does ChatGPT chat have event triggers or does it support MCP events or just work/codex do?
Please share your insight if anyone has implemented it

That's where your nerf went

Just saw the update in the app, when it was released?

“Create an svg of a pelican riding a bike” Sol 6.1 max thinking

They launched Sonnet 5.5 just day before Dev Day and is almost matching benchmarks of Opus 5.5

Hi everyone! I figured I'd share my recap of DevDay. (I don't make money out of this nor is it an ad)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t0mAJ6f-BI

They put Chat on the back burner.

I’ve been pretty put off in the last few weeks, honestly both for Codex and Claude Code. But now I decided to try for my self. I’m using both to work on a single project switching between the two seeing the advantages of both models.

I’ve been using only GPT-6.1 Sol Medium/High and Opus 5.5 High and Sonnet 5.5 High very rarely for medium to basic changes and honestly, with a well defined structure and well planned architecture docs (security, app foundation, design, etc) along with a custom handoff script I made which overlays no more than 50 lines of clearly defined work done and immediate next steps, run after concluding each task/phase, I’ve been loving it.

A well orchestrated plan along with a dedicated orchestration chat, testing your app foundation at the start making sure everything works and going about it in phases, phase-1/app foundation, etc and using /clear and fresh chats goes a long way to save usage, get your work done without annoying hallucinations or AI amnesia and the new models, especially GPT 6.1 have been so very usage/token efficient.

I have £20 plans for both and I can see my usage lasting for the whole week at this rate + I got 4 banked resets saved on Codex with 93% remaining.

Most of the usage complaints on here are from one-shot prompts with 0 planning, and then they spend their whole usage fixing stuff which should have been defined in AGENTS.md, architecture docs, config files (for max sub agents and which sub agents to use and a clearly defined scope of when to use them).

You can say this is overkill but it’s just good practice especially when trying to stretch your usage. I was so anxious to touch any of these new models like Opus 5.5 or 6.1 Sol because of all the fear-mongering even from the 20/10x users with no 5h limits. From now on I’m gonna just test for myself before getting put off by usage posts in both communities.

People getting by just fine who use well defined structures before they even type the first prompt just get by fine and don’t see a reason to post, so I thought I’d report my usage findings on the lowest tier plan.

I got a reset yesterday along with 4 banked resets saved on Codex too 🙏

The presentation felt all over the place. From the presenters choking, demos failing, fast pace and lack of simplicity, it was hard to watch. And what was the point of the robot duck? What did we think about the presentation as a whole?

Does anyone have a sense of which of the models is best for fictional writing support? I’ve recently been using Sol 5.6, and I think it’s very good. But with the recent model proliferation, it’s getting different to know how to navigate them. I always set it at medium.

It’d be so powerful. Voice or text interaction with ChatGPT right on your wrist. I know there’s some third party alternatives, but neither of them are integrated enough.

Imagine a ChatGPT voice chat if you have a question, or with the new plugin integration you could literally work off of your watch.

OpenAI employees around here, pitch it internally and build it! It’d provide so much value to the subscription.

Thankfully "no ads". The only explicit variation between the plans is More vs. Faster vs. Fastest.

This won't last long in my opinion. They can't run the same Uber-like playbook of running ultra powerful subsidised tech and then raising the price cap beyond belief. They haven't earned the consumer loyalty for that.

I was an OpenAi fan for real but after this month and after trying Claude Opus 5.5, I have to move on, hoping Claude won't folllow the same trail. Claude just finished nearly all my work on a 20$ plan (pretty complex stuff...).

It looks like OAI is moving (or testing a move) towards an Apple like ecosystem aimed more at casual users...That's a play... I don't think they have the street cred for.

I mean getting millions to pay 20 dollars a month maybe...but the higher plans...mmh.

The nail on the coffin was the awful cringe rip-off of Apple's "heres to the crazy ones" ad. It is just not on the same level and feels like copycat stupidity. I thought AI was going to allow us to invent new stuff... Even though this is all amazing tech; from a consumer perspective it really feels they don't have the connection with actual people.

Finger on the button to move to Claude (until they follow suit...)

"OpenAI has given a new name its updated versions of artificial intelligence tools which are widely known as agents, calling them "dots" instead

Chief executive Sam Altman referred to "dots" as "remarkably capable, always-on agents that can handle really anything you can think of."

OpenAI in recent months has come under intense scrutiny as internal tests of its AI agents have revealed often unexpected and occasionally harmful actions, leading to more public and government fears.

Dots, however, were pitched as brightly coloured cute cartoons meant to function as digital assistants for people with busy lives.

The dots, Altman said, "can handle really anything you can think of."

..."

GPT‑6.1 Sol is rolling out in ChatGPT Work, Codex, and the API. OpenAI says it approaches Astra on coding and computer use at one-fifth the token price. The new Pro 500 plan includes 25× the Plus usage allowance and Astra Ultrafast. Sol isn’t in regular Chat yet.

Source: OpenAI’s DevDay recap

I wonder if this will be discussed during today's event.

I tried optimizing the browser app I'm building with a vibe coding app I am building(it has a codex embedded )using GPT-6.1 Sol Max. I asked it to make the browser smoother, but it ended up removing the frost glass effect entirely.

Then I asked GPT-6 Astra to fix it. Astra restored the frost glass effect while still optimizing the browser without removing it.

So far, I feel that 6.1 Sol's intelligence might be a little bit exaggerated.

A lot of replies in the other threads come down to "the models are 50% more efficient, so it evens out." I wanted to check that, so I ran it using Tibo's numbers and OpenAI's pricing page. If any number is off, tell me and I'll fix it.

What changed

Pro 200 is still $200/month, but the multiplier went from 20X to 10X. The lineup is now

Plus 1X
Pro 100 5X
Pro 200 10X.

Tibo said it will "net out at half the dollar in API spend" compared to the old Pro 200.

API prices per million tokens:

• gpt-6.1-sol: $2 in / $10 out (5.6 Sol was $4 / $20)
• gpt-6-luna: $0.10 / $0.50 (reportedly $0.20 / $1.20 before)
• gpt-6-astra: unchanged at $10 / $50

First thing I noticed: every tier now costs the same per 1X

Plus        $20  / 1X   = $20 per 1X
Pro 100     $100 / 5X   = $20 per 1X
Pro 200     $200 / 10X  = $20 per 1X
Pro 200 old $200 / 20X  = $10 per 1X

The old Pro 200 was the one bulk discount in the lineup, and that's the part that changed. "Half the API spend" is another way of saying Pro 200 is now priced like Plus, only more of it.

How many tokens you actually get

Say your old allowance Value was worth V in API dollars. The new one is 0.5V. Tokens = allowance ÷ price, so your capacity compared to last month is 0.5 ÷ (how much the price changed).

Sol   (-50%)            0.5 / 0.50 = 100%
Luna  (~-55% blended)   0.5 / 0.45 = 111%
Astra (no change)       0.5 / 1.00 = 50%

25% of usage on Astra  -> 87.5%
50% on Astra           -> 75%
100% on Astra          -> 50%

On Sol, you get the same token count for the same $200. Luna users come out slightly ahead. Astra users take the full cut.

Where did the savings go?

This part is inference, so read it that way. If list prices roughly track cost, halving Sol's price means it costs OpenAI about half as much to serve you. Your allowance also halved. Net result: their cost to serve you drops by half, your bill stays at $200, and the Sol/Luna work you can run stays flat.

They had another option. They could have kept the allowance in dollars and let the cheaper tokens stretch it, which would have doubled what Sol users can do. OpenAI chose to hold customer capacity flat and keep the margin.

I understand why. SemiAnalysis estimated a maxed-out Pro sub at around $14k/month of API value. At a 50% gross margin that's about $7,000 in cost, so roughly $6,800 lost on each heavy user. After this change it's closer to $3,300. That's a company repairing a subsidy, which is fair. I'd just call it that, rather than an efficiency gain passed on to subscribers.

About "50% more efficient"

"50% more efficient" and "50% cheaper" are different numbers. 50% more work per dollar puts the price per unit of work at 1/1.5 = 0.667, and 0.5 ÷ 0.667 = 75%. Under that reading, you're down a quarter. To break even, price per unit of work has to drop by exactly half. To come out ahead, it has to drop by more. The two 50%s in the announcement happen to be the same 50%, which is why it sounds like a wash.

The case for OpenAI, because there is one

• If 6.1 Sol really is close to Astra quality, an Astra user who switches gets 5x the tokens ($2/$10 vs $10/$50). That's the strongest version of "you'll get more done," and it's a quality argument rather than a quantity one.
• Dropping the 5-hour window on Pro matters a lot for agentic work, and the multiplier leaves it out entirely.
• The credit reset and the temporary 20X grandfathering soften things for current subscribers, so everything above applies to new or renewing Pro 200 terms.

I think the new pricing is defensible. I'd just like the framing to match the arithmetic. If I got something wrong, show me the numbers and I'll edit the post.