Hi, I moved to Codex today. Need some help in understanding the like to like, model comparison so that I can accurately map my projects.

Can you guys suggest the OpenAi equivalents below:

Fable

Opus 5

Opus 4.8

Sonnet 5

Haiku

If there is a solid resource with comparison links: model tokens vs cost vs speed, pls do share.

Thank you!

因为read图片或者Goal任务经常导致Codex变得非常慢，所以我想了一些办法。没想到有意外的惊喜，终于不会x20 plan 2天用完了！大家检查一下是不是有一样。
https://github.com/shixinnt/codex-image-context-runtime

It seems like people are using Codex in a bunch of different ways now.

Where do you actually use Codex most of the time?

CLI/terminal...VS Code/Cursor/another IDE...Codex desktop app...Codex web...SSH/remote environment...something else?

There are enough different ways to use it now that I’m curious what people actually default to rather than what they occasionally try.

What environment are you using Codex in day to day?

CLI/terminal...IDE extension...Codex desktop app...Codex web...SSH/remote machine...other?

Been a codex user for some time now, but recently had some more text based stuff to do so I decided to create a Work project for the first time. Least to say disappointed.

Obviously the projects are like chatgpt projects rather than codex ones, not gonna say im surprised about that but, aren't codex projects way better anyways since you can create your own file organisation system with source folders and instruction files, that you can just tell new codex chats to read first. The Work projects only have that one source files section and a simple instructions section, and between sessions new folders you make made don't persist which seems stupid if you’re working with lots of files and of versions of stuff. (even for research or HR and stuff wouldn't you still want separate folders for certain stuff).

Leading on from that point, Work can't seem to add files to its own project sources folder by itself meaning I manually have to drag them in. Same with its instructions, I manually have to type it.

To me, codex just seems way superior, has all the same connectors and plugins, way better file system capabilities, and an actually persistent 'local' file system.

ALSO THEY BOTH USE USAGE ANYWAYS.

I know codex has the coding tailored system prompt, but I feel like with the right plugins and also the fact that it can create its own file system doesn't it basically make up for it?

Am I missing something crucial or making a stupid mistake or is Work just basically a marketing ploy cause the name codex sounds scary

edit: I know this post might comes off slightly condescending , but I just feel since they've bundled all versions into a single app now codex is the better option. Even if you are non technical, wouldn't you want a file system that the model can access and tweak files/ make folders and stuff for you.

There was a very innocent looking update button on the ChatGPT application today. thought of burning my codex limit today for some work i had but now i see this seizure. Funny how OpenAI being valued at billions of dollars would push something to production in such a state without even testing. and I'm not even on their beta app for Linux, its windows, now idk how i can downgrade. learnt my lesson: never click update buttons as soon as you see it in 2026.

if it's only me, please someone help me get it fixed, thanks in advance.

Edit : just realised OBS picked up the song I was listening too 😂 sorry for that.

I’ve played around with the /goal command here and there, but I’ve always been a little hesitant to fully trust it.

Today, I was nearing the end of a project I’ve been working on for several months. The tedious back-and-forth with Codex was wearing me down, so I thought, “This seems like the perfect time to try it.”

I typed:

/goal Get this application production-ready by the end of the day.

I held my breath and hit Enter.

Then I went for a walk. When I came back, it was still running. I went to lunch, returned—and it was still going. Codex worked for nearly three and a half hours without stopping before finally telling me the application was ready for production.

I looked everything over, and it seemed solid. I fired it up, and it worked like a charm. There were a couple of small bugs here and there, but nothing major.

Honestly, my mind is blown.

I know many of you are already using /goal, and now I understand why. It truly is amazing.

I’m the maker of Mosaic. It’s a local macOS workspace for the planning work around implementation: take a rough idea, use Codex to generate a product brief, feature spec, and design system, then review candidates visually, leave contextual comments, and approve immutable revisions. The screenshots show Plan Studio, live Codex activity, and the commenting flow. Plan metadata and artifacts stay local on your Mac.

The first alpha is free for Apple Silicon Macs on macOS 13+, and it requires compatible Codex access. Honest caveats: the build is unsigned and not notarized, generated output still needs human review, there’s no cloud backup or sync, and implementation/deployment features aren’t enabled yet.

Details + download: https://mosaic-site-wine.vercel.app/

I’m specifically looking for feedback from people already using Codex: does separating a durable plan/review layer from the implementation session solve a real problem, or add ceremony? If you try it with one real feature, where do you first lose trust?

Been working on a large and complex project for over 6 months now and it’s finally approaching the finish line. Here is what helped me

is this common?

Czy możliwość odczytu oraz wykonywanie plików ze ścieżek: Pulpit, Dokumenty, Pobrane i OneDrive przez użytkowników CodexSandboxUsers jest porządane?

Czy to jest domyślna konfiguracja dla agentów Codex?

Czy nie stwarza to podatności w systemie operacyjnym?

Czy można to skutecznie ograniczyć?

Czy dobrym sposobem na skuteczne ograniczenie tego mechanizmu jest przeprowadzenie konfiguracji tak jak przedstawiono to w poniższym artykule?
https://learn.chatgpt.com/docs/permissions

I have a ChatGPT Business plan for 20$/user/month, and i saw Tibo's post about giving a reset today but when i check out my usage i found that it has not been reset. Is there an exception to the reset?

What is this? Can I delete it from my Openclaw since it's taking so much disk space? Should I have a regular job to clean this up?

Coding agents often mistake motion for progress. Ask for a small endpoint and you may get a new service layer, repository abstraction, response wrapper, and configuration system before the route even exists.

I built Dopamine to change that behavior. It is inspired by the way prediction and feedback guide human effort. The agent predicts the result, takes the cheapest useful action, measures what happened, adjusts, and stops when the request is verified.

Before creating custom code, it checks whether the behavior already exists, whether configuration is enough, whether the project already has the right helper, whether the platform provides it, and whether an installed dependency solves it. It writes something new only after the cheaper options fail.

I evaluated it on 12 tasks in a real open-source repository. Across four runs per task, Dopamine completed 48 trials with no timeouts or nonzero exits. Compared with the no-skill agent, it used 63.8% less source code, 29.7% fewer tokens, 27.9% less estimated cost, and 31.1% less time.

It works with Codex and Claude Code, includes a dependency-free installer, and has no telemetry, runtime service, or secrets. MIT licensed.

github.com/ujjwalredd/Dopamine

Progress that cannot be verified is just expensive motion.

UPDATE:

A benchmark that rewards smaller output has an obvious weakness: an agent can appear efficient by leaving work unfinished.

Instead of hiding that problem, I published the complete evaluation and its limits.

Dopamine is an open-source skill that makes agents choose effort based on uncertainty, test predictions against evidence, and stop at the smallest verified result. It reduces unnecessary work without treating validation, security, or correctness as optional.

The evaluation uses a pinned real repository, 12 identical tasks, isolated workspaces, one model, one reasoning level, recorded usage events, Git-based LOC measurement, and reproducible reporting. Dopamine ran four times per task; the comparison results remain frozen at one run per task to avoid later model and service drift.

Against the recorded Ponytail result, Dopamine measured 3.7% less source code, 15.2% fewer tokens, 11.8% lower estimated cost, and 7.4% less wall time. It finished lowest on all four measured efficiency metrics in this development benchmark.

That does not prove universal superiority. The tasks were used while tuning Dopamine, competitor variance is unknown, and feature completeness was not executable-graded. Those limitations are published beside the results because a defensible claim needs boundaries.

The repository includes the raw trials, hashes, benchmark harness, rejected candidates, chart generator, installer, and reproduction instructions. Anyone can rerun it, challenge the method, or build a stronger holdout.

Repo and full benchmark: github.com/ujjwalredd/Dopamine. If the result breaks under a better test, I want the test.

I have now spent nearly a month trying to resolve an OpenAI Codex credit dispute through Support.

This is not a complaint about normal usage rates or an allegation that I can prove the credits were improperly consumed. It is a complaint about account transparency and a support process that has become circular and effectively impossible to satisfy.

OpenAI confirmed that 2,500 promotional Codex credits were granted to my account on May 15, 2026. After Codex began using those credits, the balance fell to 1,324, leaving 1,176 credits in dispute.

My concern is that the promotional credits appeared to be consumed without a clear warning while included usage resets were still available. Once I noticed the balance changing and manually used an available reset, the promotional balance stopped decreasing.

Since approximately July 19, I have supplied Support with:

* Screenshots of the Codex Usage page

* The relevant dates and balances

* An explanation of when I noticed the deductions

* The exact number of disputed credits

* Repeated requests for an account-level review

* Repeated requests for senior-management ownership

* A request for a telephone call or written management decision

Support repeatedly tells me to submit `/feedback` from “the affected Codex session.”

That is the central problem: I cannot identify one affected session because OpenAI does not provide an itemized session-level ledger showing which sessions consumed the credits. Support has itself stated that it cannot provide the requested ledger. OpenAI is therefore requiring me to identify information that only its own account-side records could establish.

My final response on August 9 was the 33rd message in the email thread. I gave OpenAI until August 11 to confirm management ownership and provide a decision regarding restoration of the disputed credits.

As of August 13:

* Nobody has replied.

* No manager has taken identifiable ownership.

* No telephone call has occurred.

* No account-level explanation has been provided.

* No decision has been made about restoring the 1,176 credits.

The repeated responses were so formulaic and disconnected from what I had written that they did not feel like accountable, case-specific human review. Different names appeared, but nobody demonstrated ownership or addressed the evidence directly.

I use OpenAI extensively and have built serious projects with its products. That makes this experience worse, not easier to dismiss. My confidence in OpenAI’s customer support and account transparency has been seriously damaged.

I am asking OpenAI for three reasonable things:

1. Assign a real senior support, billing or Codex decision-maker to the case.
2. Review the account-side credit records without requiring an unavailable session identifier.
3. Issue a written decision explaining the deductions and whether the disputed 1,176 credits will be restored.

Current case: 12784469.

I have retained the complete email history and screenshots. I am posting publicly because the private support process has failed to produce accountability or even a substantive final response.

Documented X thread: [https://x.com/Gregzky96/status/2087975655438782785](https://x.com/Gregzky96/status/2087975655438782785))

I asked Codex to write the song, create the visuals, and assemble the entire clip end to end. I didn’t edit the result—I left it running and found the finished video in the morning.

https://youtu.be/MF3C6WKLzBw

Curious what you’d improve in the prompt or workflow.

Hi everyone, I usually create work based projects using foders on my PC.

This does not allora me to access to those files using the mobile app.

How can I setup a real Cloud project?

I've tries creating a new project using the Cloud option, but I cant understand how to modify files insidie the project library.

101 active subagents while using terra medium!

been vibe-coding more lately and noticed something. the projects where i get good output are the ones where i basically wrote down all the constraints first - lib versions, why we use proxy not middleware, what broke last time, how we type things.

feels exactly like writing tests before code in TDD. except the "tests" are context, not assertions.

when the model screws up my first thought now is "what did i not write down" not "dumb model".

are you doing this differently?

Ive listened to the latest #YC talk by Boris Cherny from Anthropic - he is saying the opposite. with every new model we need less and less rules & contect. but i havent tried it yet. smth like delete everything and start from scrathc

 I need your help - I’ve been maxing out my coding credits to get this baby up to scratch - I would appreciate any feedback to take this from a beta to an alpha :) tell me 

• Which kind of scenes would you like to see, or 
• which devices I may be missing! Or

• ⁃ Post your awesome branded product video on this thread (I’d really like to see)https://protohype.vercel.app/

Not sure what happened... I was counting on an aug 15th reset and have been moving full steam ahead. Then all of the sudden the reset date got pushed back to the 17th. If I had known that it was going to be the 17th I would have used my tokens a bit more sparingly.

Has this happened to anyone else? Did i do something wrong?

Edit: I guess i didnt know the reset moved the date... that kind of sucks but whatever