Sudden extreme reduction in remaining usage even with Pro 5x

I am working with Codex on a MATLAB project. It’s been doing a terrific job of injecting code. It has been doing so for weeks as I’ve been asking it to build functions and classes. Today I’ve noticed an extremely fast reduction in remaining usage. At this point, I’m afraid to make any requests.
My last request was with 5.6 Terra High, and my request was the equivalent of adding 20-30 lines of code. After a half hour it was still chugging away. The most unexpected thing is that my weekly remaining usage dropped from around 43% to 26%. That isn’t in a 5-hour limit. That is for my WEEKLY limit. And this is with Pro 5x limits. Has anyone experienced this? Normally, it takes more than a day of constant usage to see that sort of reduction in my weekly remaining usage.

I stopped the progress of the Codex task. I’m wondering if it got in a loop. But I still can’t imagine why it would result in such a reduction.

I am experiencing what appears to be the same issue, and the usage depletion has become significantly worse over the past few days.

My Codex weekly allowance is now being consumed roughly 10–20× faster than during my previous normal usage, despite working on similarly scoped tasks.

For one direct comparison, essentially the same implementation task consumed:

  • About 25% of my Codex weekly limit using Sol at medium reasoning
  • About 3% of my Claude Code weekly limit using Opus at medium reasoning, although it consumed around 65% of Claude’s separate five-hour limit

This is especially difficult to explain because, on paper, Sol is supposed to be cheaper to run than Opus. Yet for comparable work, Codex consumed roughly eight times as much of the available weekly allowance.

More recently, three small and tightly bounded code-review feedback tasks consumed approximately 43% of my Codex weekly allowance before the celebratory reset announced by Tibo for reaching 8 million active users across Codex and ChatGPT Work. After that reset, the remaining tasks consumed another 82% of the newly restored weekly allowance.

These were narrow review-feedback fixes, not repository-wide implementations or open-ended tasks. Consuming most of an entire weekly allowance for this amount of work seems completely unreasonable, even for a $20 subscription, and is far outside my previous Codex experience.

OpenAI has also been providing frequent usage resets as Codex reaches user milestones. While the resets are appreciated, they do not address the underlying problem and may actually hide how severely the normal weekly allowance is being depleted.

The removal of the five-hour limit may hide the issue further for many users. There is no longer an obvious short-window limit being exhausted, but at the current depletion rate, the weekly limit effectively feels like the old five-hour limit. Users may only notice the problem after most of their entire weekly allowance disappears within one working session.

My concern is that these resets are temporarily masking either:

  1. A serious metering or accounting problem; or
  2. A substantial intentional reduction in effective usage limits.

If the lower effective allowance is intentional, OpenAI should communicate this clearly. Otherwise, frequent resets risk gradually getting users accustomed to dramatically lower normal limits without explaining what changed.

I reported the issue to OpenAI support and eventually got the support AI assistant to escalate it. It has now been more than 48 hours, but I have received no human response, escalation reference number, or confirmation that the underlying usage logs are being reviewed.

Without per-session details for input tokens, cached input, output tokens, retries, tool calls, repository scans, and subagent activity, it is impossible to determine whether this is legitimate consumption or incorrect metering.

Given the sudden change, the scale of the depletion, the comparison with Claude Code Opus, and the fact that Sol should theoretically be cheaper than Opus, this does not appear to be normal model-cost variation.

I would also like to hear from other users about whether they are seeing the same pattern in either their weekly allowance or the previous five-hour allowance.

I noticed this change quickly because I carefully ration my usage, keep tasks tightly scoped, and try to get the most value possible from the $20 subscription. Under normal conditions, both the five-hour and weekly allowance decreases were reasonably predictable based on the size and complexity of the task.

That is why this recent change is so obvious to me. The consumption is not just slightly higher than usual; it is a sudden and very large increase that is completely out of line with my previous usage patterns. Since the five-hour limit was removed, the weekly allowance now appears to be depleting at a rate that feels comparable to the old five-hour limit.

Please share whether your weekly allowance is also dropping much faster than expected, whether you observed similar behavior in the former five-hour allowance, or whether your usage still appears normal.

Here’s more information regarding the fast usage drop. I think it is related to the automatic context compaction. I would imagine that attempting to distill the conversation into a compact form while retaining important information is not an easy task.

During the Codex response that caused the high amount of usage, there were 38 ‘Context automatically compacted’ occurrences, many of the being in series. Here is an example;

* Agent stating what it will do next *

Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted

* Agent stating what it will do next *

Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted
Context automatically compacted

Context automatically compacted

.
.
.

I forced the agent to stop, so I’m not sure how long this would have gone on for. I then made a new request, asking the agent about the last response, whether it completed the task or not and whether it could provide information regarding its performance. I don’t know whether it was making a guess or could actually see the progress and determine what was going on (and it may have been biased by how I worded the question), but its response was:

"I drifted into an over-engineered validation and verification loop: repeatedly re-reading implementation details, planning extra interface checks, expanding the proposed patch, and emitting too many progress updates.

The repeated “Context automatically compacted” events were a symptom of that. Each compaction preserved and re-summarized a very large conversation history, which compounded usage."

I then asked for it to make a surgical update to the code. The same issue occurred with the constant compacting, causing a 3% usage of my weekly amount in 3 minutes of thinking. I again, forced the task to stop.

It is more obvious when you have both claude code and codex subscriptions, the sudden change is very drastic, currently even luna model drains as much or even more than fable model on usage limits, and i think alot of people are blindsided by this change (if intentional) by the temporary removal of the 5h limits, and most casual users will be none the wiser. Where as people who min max usage like me get hit super hard wondering why codex as the more economical option providing generous usage and work output suddenly is only able to provide 1/10th of the work from claude code.

Of course to be fair anthropic is having a 50% increase in usage limit promo, but still, even at baseline codex is currently so much worse in usage limits.

what is worse is all the limit resets also mask this further, placating most people that they are generous, then when they stop giving out free resets, this will be the new normal with secret cut to the limits. (to be fair this is conspiracy theorizing at this point but with no open communication or even admittance to this issue, i am starting to lean more and more towards this)

Hi everyone,

I encountered an abnormal and extremely aggressive usage consumption on Codex today while using GPT-5.6 Soul Medium.

My available 5-hour usage quota dropped from ~99% to 0% in less than 5 minutes during a single, scoped software-verification task. The agent did not even manage to complete the run or generate the final report before the entire quota was instantly exhausted.

### Context & What Triggered It:

* **The Task:** Standard integration invariant verification, adding focused tests (approx. 1000 lines of test code added), running local test suites, and running validation commands (typecheck, prisma validate).

* **The Setup:** I have a local file-watching utility tracking file changes in real-time.

* **The Glitch:** Because the agent was performing fast, consecutive file modifications and test execution steps in under 5 minutes, it seems to have triggered an aggressive **Context Ballooning / Looping effect**.

* **The Issue:** With every minor incremental update, the system was sending and receiving massive chunks of our code base in rapid succession. The entire 5-hour window was wiped out in 300 seconds without triggering a single rate-limit warning, throttling, or warning me about high token-per-minute consumption.

### Questions for the Community & OpenAI Staff:

1. Has anyone else experienced their 5-hour window completely drained in literal minutes when using agents with local file-watching setups?

2. Is there a way to prevent the agent from aggressive concurrent state-checks to stop this token hemorrhage?

3. Since this is clearly an execution handling/accounting issue on the platform side (consuming 1 hour of quota per 1 minute of real time is mathematically absurd for a single session), does OpenAI restore credits for such systemic glitches?

Any insights or similar experiences would be highly appreciated.

Thank you!

I had a similar issue (sorry I didn’t see this post for some reason before I made my own). I’m not sure if the cause is the same but the agent kept compacting the context after each action. Not after each task, but between every micro action it performed. It compacted the context 38 times. I couldn’t stop it either. I had to force close the program and then restart my computer. Sometimes I would see it frop a single % point after a compaction (I’m guessing it was really somewhere around 0.5% each time it happened, but the usage doesn’t show that resolution).

Yes, it seems like there is a serious issue with usage metering, or silent nerf (until official statement comes) to the usage limits. We can only wait for an official statement from OpenAI regarding this, as seems like they know there is an issue, from the 5h limit removals, and the frequent reset distribution, but yeah we are all in the dark about this.

see here for my own observations Sudden extreme reduction in remaining usage even with Pro 5x - #2 by Dev107

Hi everyone,

The 5h limit restrictions have been temporarily lifted across Plus, Pro and Business plans.

For more info:
https://x.com/thsottiaux/status/2076365965915467978

1 Like

Hi @sps , I don’t think removing the 5h limit and working on minor efficiency gains are the issue here. In my experience we’re getting ~5x less usage with 5.6 Sol than 5.5. That accords with the API-level bug documented at the thread named “Gpt-5.6: usage.output_tokens is ~9x actual generation (re-summed once per reasoning item), exceeds max_output_tokens, and is what gets billed”. (sadly I’m not able to post links yet :frowning:)

If Codex uses the API to calculate usage, then that would explain usage tanking.

Bug TL;DR is that all the 5.6 models’ output token count is being inflated ~5x. The token count would equate to a sustained output of 2000 TPS if true - the API’s accounting is demonstrably impossible. The bug is still present as of today. It’s easy to test - please confirm for yourself :slightly_smiling_face: