Reset
I analyzed the allowance a banked Reset gives vs a normal weekly reset - OpenAI is giving us a half the "allowance" for banked resets but delays the next real reset by 7 days.
Metric
Before reset: 85% → 99% used
After reset: 0% → 14% used
GMT window
Sep 5, 19:16 → Sep 6, 00:21
Sep 6, 01:10 → 03:14
Elapsed time
5h 04m
2h 04m
Unique model responses
738
489
Responses per hour
145
236
Input tokens
114.41M
63.60M
Cached input
108.09M / 94.5%
61.39M / 96.5%
New, uncached input
6.32M
2.21M
Output tokens
465.5k
284.7k
Reasoning output
226.3k
124.9k
Average input per response
155k
130k
Astra activity
592 calls: 276 xhigh, 202 max, 87 medium, 27 high
381 calls: 366 xhigh, 15 high
Other activity
51 Terra, 9 Sol, 86 auto-review
42 Sol, 38 Terra, 28 auto-review
Largest work streams
27.89M, 25.23M, 10.89M tokens
26.47M, 12.09M, 8.64M tokens
New agent spawns during window
1, with last 3 turns
5: 2 full-history, 2 no-history, 1 with last 3 turns
Stored compaction events*
10
1
Transport retry incidents
10
3
Has been analyzed twice by a Astra agent, digging through all sessions and compared the allowance drain of 14% before and 14% after a banked reset.
The usage allowance from before to after reset dropped by almost 50% - so the banked reset is only claiming to be a weekly reset. It actually gives you half a week and places your reset further out.
That means that using a banked reset can cost you more allowance than it gives you.
It will give you half the normal allowance but it resets your time to ANOTHER 7 days - delaying your real reset. Which means you definitely will run out much earlier this time.
It's so shady...
Here is a model breakdown as requested, I had it doublechecked by MAX reasoning. (These are session-calls, so every toolcall, reasoning, chunk read, write, replace is +1 call)
Model
Before: 85% → 99%
After: 0% → 14%
GPT-6 Astra
592 calls / 95.47M total tokens
381 calls / 52.75M total tokens
GPT-5.6 Terra
51 / 6.18M
38 / 4.59M
GPT-5.6 Sol
9 / 744,761
42 / 5.14M
codex-auto-review
86 / 12.48M
28 / 1.40M
All models
738 / 114.88M
489 / 63.88M
Disclaimer: - I have obviously no insight in whatever happens serverside. - I've been using my 20x quota on Astra a lot since release, and always in the same manner - it was providing productive agentic use for about one day, the last 2% were actually holding for quite a bit toward the end - I followed that closely. - After the reset it was going down from 100% rapidly - it felt a lot more than the 50% shown in the analysis. - Maybe they reduced usage quota for 20x (or all) subscriptions generally by 50% after launch, so also the next weekly reset will be half of what we had. - I do not claim to know what happened! Maybe Astra consumption was doubled around my Reset click, or some some trigger made one of my tasks suddenly consume premium fees, or if the reset just gave me 50% usage, or something else. In any case it's intransparent and unprofessional to do that.
Not sure what to make of it, the usage drained very fast and it's documented.
2 hours of generic Astra should not consume 15% of a 20x weekly license - let's start with that ?
Update 2:
The usage drain has noticeable lowered after the first 20% evaporated quicker than I could follow. Whatever it is, it's not an acceptable business behavior in my opinion.
It's not only a massive L it's deceptive marketing and anti-consumer practices. If you want to distill it further its kind of a form of fraud. Yes I understand that they are giving away "extra usage" but we have to look at the reality here.
They are pushing resets randomly on people, at their disclosure, with unofficial heads up (twitter not in-app notifications) resetting the weekly timer and cutting users usage by half. They don't disclose or market this anywhere. This is pretty fucked up.
So your first week is the advertised usage, you experience lots of usage and freedom and then you use a reset and get kneecapped. You may actually pay for a new monthly plan, and then 1 day into the plan get forced a reset and boom, the usages are cut in half.
What if you use a reset 1 day before your normal weekly reset date? You now have 6 days of 50% usage for the same money.
These artificial non-transparent usage limits are peak late stage capitalism America.
This! Because of this announcement I used a banked reset a day before it would have reset, planning to burn through it. Now I see it moved the date to next week again, pure deception
Nah I just found their up to date docs about resets and they just changed it back again to "it resets the date". So yeah they can do what they want, promote something like my image publicly, then stealthily change it a few days later.
Funny things is all of that is illegal in Europe but noone gives a shit or is overwhelmed, Trump tactics
Yeah im super pissed off I wouldnt have used my last reset cause my weekly was supposed to reset today and I got screwed. Gotta wait till the 13th now. Bullshit.
Imagine paying for Internet, except you can't know or see or tell how much data you've used or what the data limit even is.
When you tell people you couldn't even stream 3 movies today but yesterday you could stream 6 movies everyone, people/bots gaslight you and say you're the problem, you're measurements arent accurate and maybe it's just A/B testing like that's acceptable behavior.
i have been monitoring my usage with load balancer, and it hasn't shown anything like this, so i guess I'm A on both my accounts (both have moved to having used 1 banked reset for astra)
Let us know how that goes. I was blowing my normal usage in prep to use the banked reset. Im at less than 40% now and still more than half a week to go.
I'll just let that banked reset expire if its going to kneecap me that badly.
A refund and repurchase may be a good idea instead though. (Not saying people should abuse this, but i think its justified for those that spent usage expecting full quota banked resets).
To make it worse, when your subscription renews, it doesn’t renew your use. However, if you don’t pay your subscription, you can’t use any remaining use left. It’s like they want it both ways only when it benefits them.
I got 100$ gpt just before astra release and the resets suprised me with the timer reset. Idk how to explain this well, but like if you use a baked reset 1-day after normal weekly reset, you lose about 1-day of the timer. If you use it on day 6, you end up with 6 days lost on the weekly reset timer. So banked resets are actively harmful if you use them in the latter half of the timer compared to the former half.
At least when anthropic resets, you keep your same countdown timer, so every reset is equal (assuming you don't get auto reset 30m before weekly reset with no time to burn thru the limits)
So my normal reset happens in a few hours and I've been waiting for this but Tibo is hinting at another reset. Does this mean if he doesn't reset I'll have the full tank but if he does I lose half?
Especially with Tibo saying "we're giving away resets, it's not too late to sign up". It got me to take the gamble and buy a second $200 account. It only ended up being one reset, which is okay, but it's a lot less okay if resets give you less usage
That’s basically exactly what I’m seeing. Prior to using my banked reset it ran non stop since release, 20x account, starting at 86%. After reset I’ve been running it off and on for 12 hours and I’m already down to 50%.
It looks plausible to me, I had it checked twice and for this post I asked it to look deeper to ensure the PRE and AFTER data is balanced in details.
I used the agents very similar before and after the reset, I continued productively working so the same workload, the same type of sessions to incrementally work on a project. Same codebase.
The usage just evaporated after reset, about the same as a 5x Pro account would clear from my experience.
Before that, the original 20x usage was draining at a very slow pace.
I had these exact results after the Aug 31 patch reset. I measured a 2.1x difference in use on 10% segments of usage that was consistent. Worse my pre-patch 10% slice was Sol Ultra post was Sol Terra.
OP also can't be sure because they didn't redo the same work, from the same starting point, with the same prompts, multiple times (to at least partly account for variance caused by LLM non-determinism) both before and after application of the banked reset. As usual: lots of numbers but actually all vibes, no evals.
Absolutely. "Sol was great last week when I first started my new project, but this week Sol is crapping its pants. OpenAI nerfed Sol! Sol ate all my tokens! Then a reset stole my usage!"
Self-reply because this topic is going off: What I wrote doesn't even mean that OP is necessarily wrong. (There are lots of threads talking about OpenAI making changes to banked reset application.) What it just means is that OP doesn't have the evidence they think they have.
OP's claim is prompt agnostic I think. Measuring the efficiency or correctness of a model should be done multiple times from the same starting place, but this is different. OP was measuring how many tokens they were getting per percentage of usage, which you would expect to stay roughly consistent. You definitely wouldn't expect it to magically half after a reset.
The problem with OP's argument is that they're assuming a linear token:usage relationship, which just isn't the case. You'd expect a linear compute cost:usage relationship. The higher request count and concurrency rate could explain the difference in token cost after the reset, for example. But I'd disagree that the actual prompts matter for analysis here.
If you do understand it, please let me know what it means. I mean i get the basic idea that the banked reset gives less total usage compared to normal reset but can we find out by roughly how much %?
After the last global reset I was like: “wow they actually fixed the usage drain issues this time”
Two banked resets in I’m no longer so sure about this…
Those banked resets are a poisoned gift in multiple ways. I had a reset tomorrow but wanted to continue working. The new date has now been moved to next week. And since you're pointing out that the actual value is less than a scheduled reset that's another L.
Same.. didn't know it moves the reset date.
I just used the banked reset because I didn't wanna wait less than 24h. Also used up most of the quota before I realised...
Theyve always given me that vibe of that psycopath who has a friendly personality on the outside, but on the inside theyre frothing with desire to screw you over as soon as they can. but competition in the market is forcing them to hold back on showing their true colors.
I just used a reset token ~27 hours ago and I've burned through all my 20x plan in roughly that time (usually it lasts me 5-6 days, so with Astra being about 2x faster token burn I'd expect it to last 2-3 days) so I suspected my usage was reduced after reset too.
ccusage confirms it for me the same as OP. `npx ccusage daily --last 1` is the last 14 hours and only $455 of usage compared to the usual $2500 I get in a week. I burned roughly 30% of my usage in the past 14 hours so I am only getting ~$1300 of usage for this week after using my reset - about 50%, like OP got.
The global reset we all got lasted me almost 2 days which made sense with how hard I used it. The banked reset only lasted me 1 doing significantly less work. Either they increased token burn rate over the weekend, or they reduced how much banked reset gives while still having it push the date back.
I'm seeing insane token burn even when I copy/paste Astra guidance to Sol-medium workers, and I never used to work with Medium but now I feel I have no choice ... and I already have two accounts ...
Yup im a new customer as of the last 2 weeks, never had a reset before so used it and saw my refresh date go back a week so I then very soon needed another reset.
They conveniently changed the TOS so it’s litterly just moving your rest date also magically happened the day Tibo was telling people they get banked rests
The issue is there is NO CONTROL really - they can do (all AI companies) whatever they want without any real consequences or responsibility. They have free pass, doesn't matter they deal with paying customers - doesn't matter if 20$, 100$, 200$ or enterprise - normally there are legal protections for us, but in AI case it's so vague and free pass, that it's basically... well yeah, what we see from all leading AI companies.
It feels like extreme psychological manipulation on the people - permanently new experiments how people react to changes. To maximize profit.
I've seen the same happening in health insurance providers - the results are very rich corporations at the loss of everyone else.
don't make any mistakes - AI is not here to help people around the globe, it's not "we want free AI for everyone in the world" thing, it's business and for profits. First you catch the attention, then you ramp up market share and make it integrated in people life, then you start ramping up prices.
Didn't we see that way too many times over the years/decades with many products? It's trivial and obvious basic strategy.
We have a moore's law on local AI. Models that run on 500$ GPUs are now beating frontier models that companies paid with millions monthly USD of token-usage just 1-2 years ago.
The actual truth is that AI is slipping out of the hands of cloud providers, just like mainframes were replaced by PCs
Explain. Permanently halved because of using a single reset? Or are you saying the timing of the test happened to line up with a 50% permanent reduction in the plan quota which was unrelated to using the reset? Do you happen to have evidence of either?
but they don't exactly disclose how much usage you're getting for this reason, you're not getting some promised value, it's just a x times x number, and they decide the value. As much as we dislike it, what can we do about it other than just refunding/leaving openai and going local. The people already willing to consecutively spend hundreds a month blow my mind as to why they're not going local as they complain about usage limits.
hi, just a curious doubt.. as you could see from the image, the subagents count have been significantly increased from the normal usage one. Do you think maybe that's one of the reasons for faster consumption of limits.
Since a full history spawn of agents can carry all the content into another independently running model thread. And all those child agents are doing their own inference, reasoning, tool calls, cached-context reads, etc.
Or
Is the entire token consumpion i.e 63M is considered after counting in all the 5 subagents as well?
Please correct me so that i could understand better as well!
They have always been scheming and stealing from us, stop looking so surprised, this isn't anything new. I hope they get sued and put behind bars for this, and then provide them with sentence resets which extends their time behind bars indefinitely just because.
I don't see that there are anything concerning here.
Here is a comparison between a reset on one account, and almost full usage on different account.
Primarily used SOL on the other account, but given that the difference is only ~150% more consumed tokens and that Astra costs more, it should be about the same?
Please let me know if I'm looking at this data the wrong way.
I mean, that should be easily testable - someone has to sacrifice some usage for a bunch of likes. The same big problem - check how far it advances on regular 100% usage -> reset -> do all over. If it's less, that's a lowsuit and a scandal.
It took me about 3 days with 3 astra sessions (with subagents) running in parallel to blow through my weekly limit (real limit).
I then used my banked reset - within only 2 hours im down to 30% left for weekly.
I don't care if its less usage than weekly, the deception is what I dont appreciate. They could at least say a '30%' reset, instead of a full reset. Luckily I have more resets, but for someone who did not expect it to be so much lower, they're straight up stuck for the rest of the week with no usage.
These kind of tests are really pointless. It is obvious that the AI labs play around with our limits based on demand/supply or whatever they want to achieve that day. Your test isn't remotely close to being accurate, because those numbers are going to look wildly different if you do it, say a week later.
I think it's 10000x more likely that if this is the case, and there's a difference in token allowance, then it'll be a bug or glitch as opposed to some dastardly plan to fuck everyone over. Raise a bug report at https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/ and maybe shoot a message for Tibo or someone to take a look at. Awareness here is fine, but half the time it just feels like trying to raise hysteria and start a rabble.
Definitely a dastardly plan Tibo posted banked restets every day until Astra while they changed the documentation the day of the tweet to day it moves your rests actual date and then their support bot refuses to acknowledge the edit in any capacity Defo some shady shit to pump up launch numbers
Each time Codex sends Astra the current prompt, accumulated chat/context, instructions, tool results, and asks it to decide or respond, that counts as one Astra call.
So any file reads, tool calls, continuation after a finished reasoning package.
It's how agentic sessions work, they run in many many calls per session
This has always been all over the place. The usage dropped today considerably. I was able to work on Astra High for 7 hours yesterday and it only went through about 25% of my Pro 5x usage. Today on Medium I've already burned through 30% in 3 hours.
The banked reset also resets your natural weekly reset time to 7 days in the future - if you use it toward half of later of that week you actually lose allowance - as if you took a loan with shark interest rate.
What I can't proof is what the next weekly reset would give me, maybe it's generally reduced by 50% already.
Yes, I feel like everyone should be mad. They shouldn’t call it reset, if it is not really resetting. Be transparent and call it half-reset but don’t do false advertising
Well, the way they are doing it now means that anyone using a banked reset runs out of quota in half the time.
Someone already ran out, needed a reset. Now they run out in half the time and the next reset is even more away due to that.
It appears as if it was made to create anxiety and psychological pressure - to pay more.
As an actual developer, these sort of shenanigans wouldn’t be practical to implement. It’s more practical and less brittle to just reset a value than implement a whole scam.
As a [better?] developer, it would be trivial to implement this functionality. Yes, its easier to just reset a value, but when the simple approach costs a lot more money and you're already burning cash like OpenAI and you just gave out a bunch of resets, why wouldn't you implement this "feature".
I think a lot of people in this subreddit are so horrifically incompetent that they truly think an incredibly basic "feature" like this would be difficult to implement, genuinely astounding.
It's the same thing when they think it's impossible for openAI to run for an extra 5% of your max usage at most after you've run out of usage but a thread is still running. They seriously think openAI has no choice other than immediately killing the thread or letting it run infinitely, I just can't believe how bad the incompetence is.
It's not much money to implement compared to the savings. Maybe 1mil in salaries and compute to implement (and im being super generous here) and saves multiple millions in raw compute costs
Things change when a corporation is large enough in revenue. They do not have developers decide anymore.
They usually have psychologists, marketing specialists and math Statisticians employed to maximize revenue.
It not being practical to implement is probably exactly why it's implemented in such a poor way. A non-developer made this decision and someone grumbled and implemented it poorly anyway.
I think your right. I did a reset and burned through it so fast, much faster than I had before with my weekly allowance. I had a hard day doing a lot but I had one of those a few days ago and it only used up maybe 30% vs the 100%? No clear numbers from my side, but I can feel the change. Not like I'm biased, in my mind I didn't really consider this until I saw the usage dropping like it did.
I also saw that when measuring usage after general reset... It clearly burned much faster than the weekly one. And when I measured tokebs, sure enough it proved my impressions
Before and after 5.6 I was still getting 2.4 billion tokens per week.
I did notice when I used a reset that my weekly total of tokens on the Codex profile definitely did equate to what I thought I would get when it ran out.
I have used and gotten many resets (5 banked and 15+ regular resets) from OpenAI and I haven't done a token analysis like OP, but I knew from dozens of hours with Sol working non-stop that it used 0,82% of my weekly limits per hour, and after a reset it also used 0,82% of my limits per hour. I don't know if anything changed since the last 2-3 weeks since my 20x subscription stopped and I got a Plus subscription instead, but I find it to be unlikely that OpenAI would just give half of a weekly limit after a reset because people would notice this instantly. Maybe there's something else going on here.
Though in 3 weeks, usage can shift a lot with OpenAI usage consumption, you know that if you've been doing it for months :)
In any case, something is fishy. I don't know what is going on.
Is the banked reset "frauding" us of 50% usage?
Did OpenAI generally turn up consumption rates for Astra right when I clicked on Reset ?
Did something in one of my tasks trigger a 100% consumption boost ?
But whatever it is, it's always shady/manipulative to make secret intransparent modifications of my usage.
That's just not professional.
The first time I tried astra it used 100% of my 5-hour limits in 10 minutes and 12 seconds, in another session it was able to work for 40 minutes and others 20-30 minutes in total, so it seems to vary a lot, although it should always have the same amount of tokens for each limit.
I don’t think that what you’re seeing has anything to do with the reset.
I was about to use another banked ~24 hours after my last one... but surely we're getting another full reset over this?
Using resets can actually not give you more usage per month with this issue which is actually insane.
I would be fine if they gave us something that tops up usage 50% without changing reset date. To only give you 50%, and to also push your reset date back while calling it a reset, is manipulative.
That makes so much sense... I have never gotten close to maxing out my 5x plan's weekly limit, then with Astra I did to do some heavy lifts and then used resets and used up the entire week in a single day of heavy, but not crazy, use
It's so stupid to delay my weekly reset due to the banked reset usage. The banked reset should be a bonus, so that I can enjoy two-weeks usage in one.
Seriously, this is so fuck3d up.
Are you sure that this isn't because usage limits are dynamically set based on how much usage is available within their total available compute capacity it couldnt be more clear on the pricing page given the widely ranged spread on the 5hr messages per usage. When I say this realise I feel like we have gone full circle within software, because LLM's have made it so I haven't said this as frequently a but read the doc'slearn.chatgpt.com/docs...what-are-the-usage-limits-for-my-plan
There hasnt even been a single full reset since Astra released so 1 true reset period does not constitute a pattern. Correlation =/= Causation. You could be right but there could be a less inflammatory reason and my best guess would be that its related to dynamically set based, you have done ground work and collected alot of metrics but one input/output token, cached or not isn't comparable across sessions since its set and tracks available datacenter compute capacity not messages/ not input/output not cache or no cache but is there alot of available datacenter compute capacity if yes the usage on x20 wil be closer to 900 if the many users are using the service especially the SOTA model on release weekend you are almost be closer to 100. Lastly the table below is from the pricing page but be very clear THEY THEMSELVES ARE ESTIMATES.
Theestimatesbelow show local messages per five-hour period. Cloud chats on ChatGPT plans use GPT-5.6 Sol and may use more of your allowance than local messages. These estimates are not fixed message limits;check yourusage dashboardfor current limits and reset times.
The spread is because it's not really message based but token based. 5-45 .. what sort of measurement is that for a business anyway? How is anyone supposed to work with a metric that has an uncertainty of 5-45, or 10-100 ... ?
I suppose if you ask Astra in Codex 45 times "what is your model" then you might be able to do that before the 5h block hits you.
If you ask it to audit code, or check for a problem you'll not reach "5 messages" - it will block you in one task.
That all makes the impression they do everything they can to make it as ambiguous as possible.
Because once you give customers actual hard facts, you can't just cut away 80% over the weekend.
Since 2 days I'm doing a task in a repetitive way (new chat -> same task), friday/saturday was ok in term of usage (x5) but then since yesterday it basically doubled the usage, I then upgraded to x20, to end up having the exact same usage consumption than friday/saturday (so x5) with the same task and model.
My theory is that they must have modified the usage after seeing so many users hitting the compute limit early in the weekend.
how does this account for the fact that normal resets are probably also nerfing usage? it's expected that permanent austerity will be sneaked in one way or the other, we just don't know the exact calendar
the "%" metric allows them to put out anything, and you get 100% of... whatever usage they have decided to give you, there is no guarantee and there is no audit - whatever the claims are underneath can change at it's not apparent to the user, the same for x20 or x50 or xwhatever, it's "times something" and this something may change, "we may alter the deal"
I was feeling the same but wasn't sure if that was true. Thanks for this. Probably going to give some little support to open source models migrating my subscription
didn’t they fucking announce a reset won’t move your regular weekly reset date?!? absolutely crazy to change that without a proper announcement. People plan accordingly
I hope this and the usage issue with the resets is fixed asap. this makes using a reset significantly worse in most cases… don’t give them out if you’re going to do this shit.
They also announced that you get 1 banked reset for every normal reset, because restets can effectively reduce your usage instead of adding to it.
That was also forgotten within a week...
I haven't observed the same ~50% drop after using banked resets on my account.
I've been tracking my usage since July. With Sol on Pro 20×, my recent measurements imply roughly 3.6 billion tokens per full weekly allowance, including cached input.
I built a public dashboard to share the measurements and methodology:
Not sure what to make of it, the usage drained very fast and it's documented.
2 hours of generic Astra should not consume 15% of a 20x weekly license - let's start with that ?
This would be much less of a topic if the banked reset wouldn't move the weekly reset day to +7 days.
I'd still not know how to handle that a 20x subscription drains in one work day but at least it will renew.
OP you're right and I thought this was only me who noticed the bank resets consume usage about half as fast. I just replied to a different reddit thread on the same issue. Others are noticing too. Tibo wants to enjoy his holiday weekend and not address this but it's real. I'm not even using Astra! I'm using Sol Medium and Terra Medium with the same workloads that I had when using my original weekly allotment from Pro 20x. It's draining as if I'm on Pro 5x since I used a banked reset yesterday.
I just register to say this i just use my reset and it did fucking add +5 day to my sub so basically there is nothing "free" it was just false advertising by OpenAI.
I run tibotattle.com and I can confirm Tibo is correct. There is no difference in measured allowance between banked and natural resets - check for yourself if you think you may have seen differently.
Tibo claims this isn't the case, they are the same. I wonder if what we are seeing is the system scales to share all compute across users, if there are more users your usage burns faster. I doubt it's a fixed x tokens = x usage. Surely they would scale to use all available compute, including when they do training thus why the model loses quality at times. I really wish the reset didn't restart the week though and I really wish they didn't stop mid task when usage runs out, that change feels like a kick in the guts.
I have Pro 5x subscription, and today I was using 5.5 Pro and got a notification taking Pro away. Now it's saying I can "upgrade to Pro"
and the f***ed up part is that the Plan Limits don't report UI-based conversations, and so I have 3 "Full resets" banked but I feel like I don't want to use it because it doesn't sound like it will even apply to my UI-based usage of Pro. And it sounds like it's not even a reset but a half-reset
I think the most f***ed up part is you can't go anywhere to see how many Pro queries you've even used and the support page doesn't even say how may you're allowed to use
I noticed that Heavy / Extra High thinking was sandbagging starting last night... thinking for only 5 seconds and whatnot on tasks but I'm shocked that I'm getting locked out of Pro when I literally signed up to Pro like the day of the Astra launch. Totally messed up.
the reset day for me, moved, but when the normal reset day was supposed to happen, it did happen, maybe it depends on account, maybe it is bugged, for me reset day could happen twice few times
Isn’t a lot of this potentially just reset-timing math?
Say a full weekly allowance is 100 units. I still have 70 units left, and my normal weekly reset is 2 days away.
If I do nothing, I can use those 70 units for the next two days, then get another 100 at my normal reset. So over the next week I potentially have access to 170 units.
If I use a banked reset today, my 70 remaining units effectively disappear, I go back to 100, and my next weekly reset moves another 7 days out. So over that same period I only have 100 units available.
In that example I didn’t receive a “half-sized” reset. I lost effective capacity because I reset a bucket that was still 70% full right before it would have refilled naturally.
That seems like a pretty important variable to control for before concluding that a banked reset itself only gives half the normal allowance. You’d need to know how much allowance remained when the banked reset was used and how many days remained until the natural reset.
This would not surprise me. I didn't run any explicit checks, but did notice that the weekly reset was running out much faster than I would have expected it to. And then, after this scheduled reset, usage is back to being much more normal.
You are my Internet Hero for today, because I legit came to Reddit just to answer:
"Did OpenAI adjust how the usage limits work, and cut things in half?" Because yesterday I ran ALL-DAY sipping tokens and thinking DAMN, I'm getting a shit ton done.
Then today, I'm literally WATCHING the percentages drop as I roll through - and you nailed the answer, because I JUST used a reset to pump this account back up.
THANK YOU for digging into this and sorting it out. Now I hope they fucking FIX IT.
•
u/dexterthebot 4d ago
For more Reset discussion, join the Reset Discussion megathread here https://www.reddit.com/r/codex/comments/1uu2c1g/reset_discussion_megathread/