12 ms·

Pro Max 5x quota exhausted in 1.5 hours despite moderate usage

• lvl155 5mo ago
  Constant complaints about Anthropic. Not much on OAI/Codex. It seems people should just use OAI and come back when they realize compute isn’t free elsewhere.
• cmaster11 5mo ago
  For whoever else is having the same problems, worth voting these kind of issues. There needs to be more transparency over what goes on with our subscriptions.
  • TacticalCoder 5mo ago
    We vote here on HN and it's much more effective. Anyone from Anthropic reading conversations on HN like this one can be scared. We'll jump ship if they don't address such glaring issues.
    • GorbachevyChase 5mo ago
      The nice iOS app is a big convenience for me, but I’m starting to think I should just put my $20 in Open Router. It seems like minimax is a pretty solid competitor. I’m curious if the US-centric “frontier” is just marketing.
      • dividedcomet 5mo ago
        imo that’s what I’m doing. Trialing the Hermes harness since I can hook it up to signal. StepFun 3.5 Flash for general assistant stuff and Kimi/Minimax for software development
    • scrollop 5mo ago
      There are MANY accounts of claude degradation (intelligence, limits) over the past week on reddit and here with many posts describing people moving. Nothing is changing. You'd think they'd at least give a statement.
      • HauntingPin 5mo ago
        People need to start cancelling their subscriptions. That's the only language these companies understand.
• hadifrt20 5mo ago
  [dead]
• wg0 5mo ago
  Been experiencing similar issues even with the lower tier models. Fair transactions involve fair and transparent measurements of goods exchanged. I'm going to cancel my subscription this month.
  • TacticalCoder 5mo ago
    [dead]
  • eastbound 5mo ago
    Yes: Claude Code “consumes tokens” and starts a session when the computer is asleep without anything started. Or consumes 10% of my session for “What time is it?”
    • j45 5mo ago
      During run the desktop app. Running non deterministic software for deterministic tasks is still an area for efficiency to improve.
• comandillos 5mo ago
  Quite scared by the fact that the original issue pointing out the actual root cause of the issue has been 'Closed as not planned' by Anthropic. https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/46829 https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/46829
  • hrimfaxi 5mo ago
    The response doesn't even make sense and appears to be written by AI. > The March 6 change makes Claude Code cheaper, not more expensive. 1h TTL for every request could cost more, not less Feels very AI. > Restore 1h as the default / expose as configurable? 1h everywhere would increase total cost given the request mix, so we're not planning a global toggle. They won't show a toggle because it will increase costs for some unknown percentage of requests?
    • stingraycharles 5mo ago
      Sounds like a decision I would make when memory is expensive and you want to get rid of the very long (in time) tail of waiting 1h to evict cache when a session has stopped. There must be a better way to do this. The consumer option is the pricing difference. If they’d make cache writes the same price as regular writes, that would solve the whole problem. If you really want to push it, use that pricing only for requests where number of cache hits > 0 (to avoid people setting this flag without intent to use it), and you solved the whole issue.
      • zozbot234 5mo ago
        Memory is expensive? If reads are as rare as they claim you can just stash the KV-cache on spinning disk.
        • stingraycharles 5mo ago
          Aren’t those latency sensitive though?
  • sdevonoes 5mo ago
• spiderfarmer 5mo ago
  That’s why I switched to Codex. It’s so much more generous and in my experience, just as good. Also, optimizing your setup for working with agents can easily make a 5x difference.
  • laksjhdlka 5mo ago
    > Also, optimizing your setup for working with agents can easily make a 5x difference. Any highlights you can share here? I'm always looking to improve me setup.
    • spiderfarmer 5mo ago
      I mostly use Laravel in my projects. Laravel Boost and the PAO package by Nuno Maduro are awesome. One makes it use make commands for example, the other reduces output for tests and errors.
  • quotemstr 5mo ago
    Plus, whenever Codex does something you dislike, you can just tell Codex to fix itself. Open source software is wonderful. Especially when it's on purpose.
  • vr46 5mo ago
    Isn't the generous Codex plan ending? Possibly yesterday? > As the Codex promotion on Plus winds down today
• jedisct1 5mo ago
  GPT-5.4 works amazingly well. I’ve moved away from Claude and toward open-source models plus a ChatGPT subscription. That setup has worked really well for me: the subscription is generous, the API is flexible, and it fits nicely into my workflow. GPT-5.4 + Swival (https://swival.dev https://swival.dev) are now my daily drivers.
  • turblety 5mo ago
    Yeah it's much better, another plus is you can use it with OpenCode (or other 3rd party tools) so you can easily switch between Codex and most other models by alright companies (not Anthropic or Google).
    • BoredPositron 5mo ago
      The two comments together sound like 2000s infomercial.
  • vidarh 5mo ago
    I hit the limits on the lower tiers of Codex just as fast as with Claude. At the moment I'm cycling between Claude, Codex, GLM5.1, and Kimi. The latter two are getting good enough, though, that I can make things go really far by doing planning with Opus and then switching to one of the cheap models for execution.
    • jedisct1 5mo ago
      I have a ChatGPT Pro plan, I use it a ton, and I've never hit the limit in the past few months.
      • vidarh 5mo ago
        We have very different levels of use. I hit the weekly limit in two days last week.
  • scrollop 5mo ago
    Chatgpt has better limits however the responses even on 5.4 xtra thinking are not as good as sonnets. Wish Claude would get their house in order.
• tedivm 5mo ago
  Something similar is happening with GitHub Copilot too. It's impossible to know what a "request" is and some change in the last couple of months has seen my request usage go up for the same style of work. Toss in the bizarre and impossible to understand rate limiting that occurs with regular usage and it's pretty obvious that these companies are struggle to scale.
  • rnadomvirlabe 5mo ago
    I find copilot to be much more straightforward, and I can track per request against my credits. Here is the explanation of what a request is: https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/concepts/billing/copilot-requests https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/concepts/billing/copilot-...
    • tedivm 5mo ago
      > A request is any interaction where you ask Copilot to do something for you—whether it's generating code, answering a question, or helping you through an extension. Each time you send a prompt in a chat window or trigger a response from Copilot, you're making a request. For agentic features, only the prompts you send count as premium requests; actions Copilot takes autonomously to complete your task, such as tool calls, do not. For example, using /plan in Copilot CLI counts as one premium request, and any follow-up prompt you send counts as another. This clearly isn't true for agentic mode though. This document is extremely misleading. VSCode has the `chat.agent.maxRequests` option which lets you define how many requests an agent can use before it asks if you want to continue iterating, and the default is not one. A long running session (say, implementing an openspec proposal) can easily eat through dozens of requests. I have a prompt that I use for security scanning and with a single input/request (`/prompt`) it will use anywhere between 17 and 25 premium requests without any user input.
      • 0xffff2 5mo ago
        Do you have any evidence to support your claims? I keep a pretty close eye on my usage and have never seen it deviate from "1x/3x requests per time I hit enter". Is there a reproducible scenario I can try that will charge multiple requests for a single prompt?
• MeetingsBrowser 5mo ago
  I pay for the lowest plan. I used to struggle to hit my quota. Now a single question consistently uses around 15% of my quota
  • hirako2000 5mo ago
    My take is that was the plan all along. Once people won't be able to think anymore and business expect the level of productivity witnessed before, will have no choice but cough up whatever providers bill us.
    • Cpoll 5mo ago
      Didn't they move too soon then? People haven't forgotten how to tie their shoelaces (yet). And anyway, they'll just move to a different model; last holdout wins.
      • hirako2000 5mo ago
        Too abruptly for sure.
      • gedy 5mo ago
        They probably don't have much choice with burn rates and investors, tbh. Market is shaky, etc.
    • hdndjsbbs 5mo ago
      "enshittification" gets thrown around a lot, but this is the exact playbook. Look at the previous bubble's cash cow: advertising. Online advertising is now ubiquitous, terrible, and mandatory for anyone who wants to do e-commerce. You can't run a mass-market online business without buying Adwords, Instagram Ads, etc. AI will be ubiquitous, and then it will get worse and more expensive. But we will be unable to return to the prior status quo.
      • hirako2000 5mo ago
        The odds of that happening are high. Trillions invested. It occurred to me an outright rejections of these tools is brewing but can't quite materialise yet.
• rdevilla 5mo ago
  Bubble's bursting, get in.
  • ozim 5mo ago
    I have the opposite conclusion. Demand is higher than supply it is just the start of bubble. Everyone and their dog is burning tokens on stupid shit that would be freed up if they would ask to make deterministic code for the task and run the task. OpenAI, Anthropic are cutting free use and decreasing limits because they are not able to meet the demand. When general public catches up with how to really use it and demand will fall and the today built supply will become oversupply that’s where the bubble will burst. I say 5 more years.
• postalcoder 5mo ago
  I had used Claude Code max as my daily driver last year and this sort of drama was par for the course. It's why I migrated entirely to Codex, despite liking Claude, the harness, more. There's this honeymoon period with Claude you experience for a month or two followed by a trough of disillusionment, and then a rebound after a model update (rinse and repeat). It doesn't help that Anthropic is experiencing a vicious compute famine atm.
  • sleepytimetea 5mo ago
    I like the term "compute famine" - it appears that all AI infrastructure is maxed out globally.
  • cmaster11 5mo ago
    I've been using Code for half a year, these past couple weeks have been a totally different experience I'm on max 20, and seeing my weekly quota going bust in ~3 days is a bit absurd when nothing has significantly changed in the way I work
    • wellthisisgreat 5mo ago
      Same exact experience. I never expected to depleted a weekly quota when not working every day of the week.
    • hirako2000 5mo ago
      I refuse to use anthropic's models (and openai, gemini) because the math simply doesn't add up. To add the fact we are being taken for fools with dramatic announcements, FOMOs messages. I even suspect some reaction farms are going on to boost post from people boasting Claude models. These don't happen for codex. Nor for mistral. Nor for deepseek. It can't just be that Claude code is so much better. There are open weight models that work perfectly fine for most cases, at a fraction of the cost. Why are more people not talking about those. Manipulation.
      • throwaway2027 5mo ago
• mannanj 5mo ago
  so basically the anthropic employee who responded says those 1h caches were writes were almost never accessed, so a silent 5m cache change is for our best interest and saves cost. (justifying why they did this silently) however his response gaslights us because in the OPs opening post his math demonstrates this is not true, it shows reads 26x more so at least in his case the cache is not doing what the anthropic employee describes. clearly we are being charged for less optimization here and being given the message (from my perspective by anthropic) that if you are in a special situation your needs don't matter and we will close your thread without really listening.
  • love2read 5mo ago
    > that if you are in a special situation your needs don't matter and we will close your thread without really listening. Are there any other $50B+ Valuation companies that care about special situations? If so, who?
    • mannanj 5mo ago
      Hmm great question. I wish I knew some. Do you?
  • hirako2000 5mo ago
    What also gives it away is the refusal to at least expose this TTL via parameter. In the same sentence as informing the 5m won't change since it's your interest. It's also in the interest of the users to keep certain params private, we are meant to deduce that. Did you not ?
  • SkyPuncher 5mo ago
    My suspicion is the have an overall fixed cache size that dumps the oldest records. They’re now overflowing with usage and consistently dumping fresh caches. During core US business hours, I have to actively keep a session going or I risk a massive jump in usage while the entire thread rebuilds. During weekend or off-hours, I never see the crazy jumps in usage - even if I let threads sit stale.
• pxc 5mo ago
  It's a bit shocking to me how opaque the pricing for the subscription services by the frontier labs is. It's basically impossible for people to tell what they're actually buying, and difficult to even meaningfully report or compare experiences. How is this normal?
  • parasti 5mo ago
    Yeah, I cancelled the moment I realized that the subscription is a scheme to get you to constantly dip into extra usage. I get more benefit out of Claude on the free tier than on Pro.
    • pxc 5mo ago
      I think the right way to think of it, from a self-protective perspective, is this: the real offer is the per-token pricing. Use that for a while, and iff you are consistently spending more than $20/mo, treat the subscription offering as a discount on some of that usage. So only on that condition, try the subscription and see if your monthly costs go down (because of the short term rate limits, they may not, depending on your usage patterns!). But the opacity itself is a bit offensive to me. It feels shady somehow.
  • gverrilla 5mo ago
    Free market.
• zkmon 5mo ago
  Unless the agent code is open-sourced, there is hardly any transparency in how the agent is spending your tokens and how does it calculate the tokens. It's like asking your lawyer why they charged some amount.
  • Havoc 5mo ago
    You can insert a proxy in between and look at precisely what it is sending if you’re so inclined CC accepts http endpoints so doesn’t require anything too complicated
  • gessha 5mo ago
    Lawyers can give you a breakdown by the minute in some cases. A better example can be military contracting.
• vfalbor 5mo ago
  Some months ago, I created a software for this reason, it has no success, but the thing is that communities could reduce tokens consumption, not all is LLM, you can share things from API calls between agents. Even my idea was no success I think it is a good concept share things each others, if you have some interest it's called tokenstree.com
• holoduke 5mo ago
  I spend full 20x the week quota in less than 10 hours. How is that possible? Well try to mass translate texts in 30 languages and you will hit limits extremely quick.
  • pxc 5mo ago
    Translation generally works well with very small models compared to the frontier LLMs. You can definitely run a model on your own hardware for this.
    • holoduke 5mo ago
      Maybe words. But quality texts in even with opus not perfect. But good enough.
      • pxc 5mo ago
        For short texts, the translation I usually want the most is fast translation, and local models are actually great for this. But for high-ish quality translations of substantive texts, you typically want a harness that's pretty different from Claude Code. You want a glossary of technical terms or special names, a structured summary of the wider context, a concise style guide, and you have to chop the text into chunks to ensure nothing is missed. Even with super long context models, if you ask them to translate much at once they just translate an initial portion of it and crap out. Are you using it for localization or short strings of text in an app? I wonder what you can do to get better results out of smaller models. I'm confident there's a way.
        • holoduke 5mo ago
          Yea. I agree. In our case we are creating short news articles of max 3 or 4 paragraphs. The texts are translated in multiple passes into various languages. We use a simple system prompt that instructs the llm to ensure simple authentic language output. With Opus we get seriously good results. The goal is not literal translation, but good translations. I tried hoiku for a while, but its not good in many languages. Sonnet is okaish, but not good enough.
• lforster 5mo ago
  Lol imagine how much overcharging is going on for enterprise tokens. This is just the beginning.
• Nic0 5mo ago
  I'm i alone to think that it become slower that usual to get responses?
  • kif 5mo ago
    Nope. It has become much much slower for me as well. It’s weird cause at times I will get a response very quickly, like it used to be. But most of the time I have to wait quite a bit for the simplest tasks.
  • SyneRyder 5mo ago
    Anecdotal, but after playing with the API this week (building a minimal harness for an OS where Claude Code isn't supported), the API felt faster to respond. It did seem like maybe the Max subscriptions are lower priority than API requests. (I hadn't enabled priority service on the API either.) I don't have metrics, so I could be imagining this, or finally noticing extra lag of the Claude Code client. On the other hand, the API was giving me range anxiety, I won't be pushing a 300k context window into that anytime soon, like I occasionally need to do in Claude Code.
• wolvoleo 5mo ago
  Yeah perplexity used to be great but they've also clamped down on the 20€ plan. Only one deep research query was enough to block me until the end of the month. The thing is, if it's going to be this expensive it's not going to be worth it for me. Then I'll rather do it myself. I'm never going to pay for a €100 subscription, that's insane. It's more than my monthly energy bill. Maybe from a business standpoint it still makes sense because you can use it to make money, but as a consumer no way.
• tiahura 5mo ago
  Also pro max 5x and hit quota for first time yesterday.
• stavros 5mo ago
  It's crazy, a few weeks ago the limits would comfortably last me all week. This week, I've used up half the limit in a day.
• geeky4qwerty 5mo ago
  I'm afraid the music may be slowly fading at this party, and the lights will soon be turned on. We may very well look back on the last couple years as the golden era of subsidized GenAI compute. For those not in the Google Gemini/Antigravity sphere, over the last month or so that community has been experiencing nothing short of contempt from Google when attempting to address an apparent bait and switch on quota expectations for their pro and ultra customers (myself included). [1] While I continue to pay for my Google Pro subscription, probably out of some Stockholm Syndrome, beaten wife level loyalty and false hope that it is just a bug and not Google being Google and self-immolating a good product, I have since moved to Kiro for my IDE and Codex for my CLI and am as happy as clam with this new setup. [1] https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues/24937 https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues/24937
  • dgellow 5mo ago
    For what it’s worth, that was pretty obvious from the get go it wasn’t a realistic long term deal. I’ve been building all the libraries I hoped existed over the past 1-2y to have something neat to work with whenever the free compute era ends. I feel that’s the approach that makes sense. Take the free tokens, build everything you would want to exist if you don’t have access to the service anymore. If it goes away you’re back to enjoying writing code by hand but with all the building blocks you dreamt of. If it never goes away, nothing wasted, you still have cool libs
    • apgwoz 5mo ago
      Yes! I’ve been trying (and failing!) to get people to understand this. Build the high leverage tools while the tokens are cheap. Unfortunately, I haven’t figured out the right set of high leverage tools. :)
  • 1970-01-01 5mo ago
    Lights on = Ads in your output. EOY latest; they can't keep kicking the massive costs down the road.
    • 5mo ago
• chandureddyvari 5mo ago
  Claude has gotten noticeably worse for me too. It goes into long exploration loops for 5+ minutes even when I point it to the exact files to inspect. Then 30 minutes later I hit session limits. Three sessions like that in a day, and suddenly 25% of the weekly limit is gone. I ended up buying the $100 Codex plan. So far it has been much more generous with usage and more accurate than Claude for the kind of work I do. That said, Codex has its own issues. Its personality can be a bit off-putting for my taste. I had to add extra instructions in Agents.md just to make it less snarky. I was annoyed enough that I explicitly told it not to use the word “canonical.” On UI/UX taste, I still think current Codex is behind the Jan/Feb era of Claude Code. Claude used to have much better finesse there. But for backend logic, hard debugging, and complex problem-solving, Codex has been clearly better for me. These days I use Impeccable Skillset inside Codex to compensate for the weaker UI taste, but it still does not quite match the polish and instinct Claude Code used to have. I used to be a huge Claude Code advocate. At this point, I cannot recommend it in good conscience. My advice now is simple: try the $20 plans for Codex and Cursor, and see which one matches your workflow and vibes best
  • zozbot234 5mo ago
    > It goes into long exploration loops for 5+ minutes even when I point it to the exact files to inspect. Give it a custom sandbox and context for the work, so it has no opportunity to roam around when not required. AI agentic coding is hugely wasteful of context and tokens in general (compared to generic chat, which is how most people use AI), there's a whole lot of scope for improvement there.
    • egeozcan 5mo ago
      But the problem is it used to not need that before. These days, you have to think twice before you summon a subagent.
      • lelanthran 5mo ago
        > But the problem is it used to not need that before. These days, you have to think twice before you summon a subagent. This is exactly what I (and many others) kept trying to tell the pro-AI folk 18 months ago: there is no value to jumping on the product early because any "experience" you have with it is easily gained by newcomers, and anything you learned can easily be swapped out from under you anyway.
• gessha 5mo ago
  I’m processing some images(custom board game images -> JSON) with a common layout and basic structure and I exhausted my quota after just 30 images(pleb Pro account). I have 700 images to process… What I did instead is tune the prompt for gemma 4 26b and a 3090. Worked like a charm. Sometimes you have to run the main prompt and then a refinement prompt or split the processing into cases but it’s doable. Now I’m waiting for anyone to put up some competition against NVIDIA so I can finally be able to afford a workstation GPU for a price less than a new kidney.
• qwertyforce 5mo ago
  thats exaclty why i prefer codex
• rvz 5mo ago
  Why so many 'developers' complaining about Claude rate limiting them? You know you can actually....use local LLMs? instead of donating your money to Anthropic's casino? I guess this is fitting when the person who submitted the issue is in "AI | Crypto". Well there's no crying at the casino when, you exhaust your usage or token limit. The house (Anthropic) always wins.
  • mr_mitm 5mo ago
    Local LLMs are nowhere near as powerful as commercial models. Plus, they have hefty hardware requirements.
  • benjiro3000 5mo ago
    [dead]
• hyperionultra 5mo ago
  Vote with wallet. The voting continues until product improve or die.
• Achshar 5mo ago
  I feel like I am living in a bubble, no one seems to mention Antigravity in these discussions and I have not had any issues with Ultra subscription yet. It seems to go on forever and the Interface is so much better for dev work as compared to CC. (Though admittedly my experience with cc is limited). I strongly believe google's legs will allow it to sustain this influx of compute and still not do the rug-pull like OAI or Anthropic will be forced to do as more people come onboard the code-gen use case.
• 10keane 5mo ago
  this same pattern seems to occur every time a new model is about to release. i didnt notice the usage problem - i am on 20x. but opus 4.6 feels siginificantly dumber for some reason. i cant qualitify it, but it failed on everyday tasks where it used to complete perfectly
  • peterpanhead 5mo ago
    Every time there is a new model coming I think they deteriorate the current. This happens every darn time. Opus 4.6 isn't as sharp, not even close to as it was few weeks ago.
• meetingthrower 5mo ago
  I don't get it. Last week on the 100 bucks plan I generated probably 50k LOC (not a quality measure for sure!) and just barely kissed the weekly limit. I did get rate limited on some sessions for sure, but that's to be expected. I'm curious what are people doing that is consuming your limits? I can't imagine filling the $200 a month plan unless I was essentially using Claude code itself as the api to mass process stuff? For basic coding what are people doing?
  • dgellow 5mo ago
    I have the same experience as you. I’m wondering if it is regional? I’m in Europe so don’t overlap much with US usage, which is likely to be way higher
    • danielbln 5mo ago
      Also in Europe and can only agree. Granted I'm on the 20x plan, but I have yet to hit a limit once and I'm using Claude 12h+ per day on multiple projects.
  • freedomben 5mo ago
    What does it look like when you get rate limited? Does the instance just kind of sit and spin? I suspect I was getting rate limited very aggressively on Thursday last week. It honestly infuriated me, because I'm paying $200 a month for this thing. If it's going to rate limit me, at least tell me what it's doing instead of just making it seem like it's taking 12 hours to run through something that I would expect to be 15 minutes. The worst part is that it never even finished it.
    • gedy 5mo ago
      > because I'm paying $200 a month for this thing. My gut feeling is this is not enough money for them by far (not to mention their investors), and we'll eventually get ratcheted up inline with dev salaries. E.g. "look how many devs you didn't have to hire", etc.
    • SkyPuncher 5mo ago
• bit1993 5mo ago
  You know Emacs still works.
• jandrese 5mo ago
  I mean this is expected is it not? These companies burned unimaginable amounts of investor cash to get set up and now they have to start turning a profit. They can't make up for the difference with volume because the costs are high, so the only option is to raise prices.
• sdevonoes 5mo ago
  I guess it’s better to step down now that we can rather than wait until it becomes impossible (Stockholm syndrome) No FOMO
• peterpanhead 5mo ago
  I don't understand Anthropic. Be consistent. Why do models deteriorate to shit, this is not good for workflows and or trust. What Opus 4.7 is gonna come out and again the same thing? Come on.
• sailingcode 5mo ago
  I had Max plan and never reached its limit despite constantly working. Now I use the Pro plan and regularly reach the 5h limit as well as the weekly limit, as expected. I found that it makes a huge difference if you provide clear context when developing code. If you leave open room for interpretation, Claude Code uses tokens up much faster than in a defined context. The same is true for his time to answer getting longer if there isn't much documentation about the project.
• algoth1 5mo ago
  Wasn't Antrophic previously offering double the token usage outside busy hours? Now they are counting tokens back at normal rate. But yeah, it's not good. I use codex because claude insists in peaking at and messing with folders and file outside its work area though
• rzkyif 5mo ago
  My personal experience is way different: I struggle to burn through more than 50% of the 5 hour limit For context, with Google AI Pro, I can burn through the Antigravity weekly limit in 1-2 hours if I force it to use Gemini 3.1 Pro. Meanwhile Gemini 3 Flash is basically unlimited but frequently produces buggy code or fail to implement things how I personally would (felt like it doesn't "think" like a software dev) I also tried VS Code + Cline + OpenRouter + MiniMax M2.7. It's quite cheap and seems to be better than Gemini 3 Flash, but it gets really pricy as the context fills up because prompt caching is not supported for MiniMax on OpenRouter. The result itself usually needs 3-6 revisions on average so the context fills up pretty often Eventually I got Claude Max 5x to try for a month. VS Code + Claude Code extension on a ~15k lines codebase, model set to "Default", and effort set to "Max". So far it's been really good: 0-2 revisions on average, and most of the time it implements things exactly how I would or better. And, like I said, I can only consume 40-60% of the 5-hour limits no matter how hard I try Granted, I'm not forcing it to use Opus like OP (nor do I use complicated skills or launch multiple tasks at the same time), but I feel like they really nailed the right balance of when to use which model and how to pass context between the them. Or at least enough that I haven't felt the need to force it to use Opus all the time
  • rzkyif 5mo ago
    Reading the other negative comments makes me wonder if this is only because I'm getting a hidden newcomer's limit bonus or something though hahah
    • muyuu 5mo ago
      it may also be local/timezone effects it has been reported that it behaves very differently depending on those factors, presumably because people are placed in best-effort buckets, who knows
• delbronski 5mo ago
  Ever since this change they announced: https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1s4idaq/update_on_session_limits/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ClaudeAI/comments/1s4idaq/update_on... It’s been unusable for me as my daily coding agent. I run out of credits in the pro account in an hour or so. Before that I had never reached the session limit. Switched back to Junie with Gemini/chatgpt.
• aeneas_ory 5mo ago
  Besides some of the obvious hacks to reduce token usage, properly indexed code bases (think IntelliJ) reduce token usage significantly (30%-50%, while keeping or exceeding result quality compared with baseline) as shown with https://github.com/ory/lumen https://github.com/ory/lumen Anthropic is not incentivized to reduce token use, only to increase it, which is what we are seeing with Opus 4.6 and now they are putting the screws on
• weavie 5mo ago
  How good are local LLMs at coding these days? Does anyone have any recommendations for how to get this setup? What would the minimum spend be for usable hardware? I am getting bored of having to plan my weekends around quota limit reset times...
  • throwaway2027 5mo ago
    Some claim that some of the recent smaller local models are as good as Sonnet 4.5 of last year and the bigger high-end models can be as almost as good as Claude, Gemini and Codex today, but some say they're benchmaxed and not representative. To try things out you can use llama.cpp with Vulkan or even CPU and a small model like Gemma 4 26B-A4B or Gemma 4 31B or Qwen 3.5 35-A3B or Qwen3.5 27B. Some of the smaller quants fit within 16GB of GPU memory. The default people usually go with now is Q4_K_XL, a 4-bit quant for decent performance and size. https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gemma-4-31B-it-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/gemma-4-31B-it-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-27B-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.5-27B-GGUF Get a second hand 3090/4090 or buy a new Intel Arc Pro B70. Use MoE models and offload to RAM for best bang for your buck. For speed try to find a model that fits entirely within VRAM. If you want to use multiple GPUs you might want to switch to vLLM or something else. You can try any of the following models: High-end: GLM 5.1, MiniMax 2.7 Medium: Gemma 4, Qwen 3.5 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/minimax-m27 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/minimax-m27 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/glm-5.1 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/glm-5.1 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/gemma-4 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/gemma-4 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.5 https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.5 https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp
    • weavie 5mo ago
      Thank you, I'll look into it. For someone who is used to just working with second hand thinkpads, this stuff gets expensive fast!
  • ac29 5mo ago
• bakugo 5mo ago
  This is your regular friendly reminder that these subscriptions do not entitle you to any specific amount of usage. That "5x" is utterly meaningless because you don't know what it's 5x of. This is by design, of course. Anyone who has been paying even the slightest bit of attention knows these subscriptions are not sustainable, and the prices will have to go up over time. Quietly reducing the usage limits that they were never specific about in the first place is much easier than raising the prices of the individual subscription tiers, with the same effect. If you want to know what kind of prices you'll be paying to fuel your vibe coding addiction in a few years, try out API pricing for a bit, and try not to cry when your 100$ credit is gone in 2 days.
• armchairhacker 5mo ago
  Make an AI usage tracker like https://marginlab.ai/trackers/codex/ https://marginlab.ai/trackers/codex/. These hearsay anecdotes prove nothing.
• brunooliv 5mo ago
  [flagged]
  • npn 5mo ago
    This is a copypasta right? I'm damn confident I have read the same content before.
  • throwaway2027 5mo ago
    They rolled out 1M context then they start doing this shit? I know Pro doesn't have access to the 1M context but what a joke.
  • stavros 5mo ago
    > Anthropic CAN change their limits and rates as they see fit, there’s never been hard promises or SLOs on these plans. No they can't. When I buy an annual subscription and prepay for the year, they can't just go "ok now you get one token a month" a day in. I bought the plan as I bought it. They can't change anything until the next renewal.
    • palata 5mo ago
      Agreed. I wouldn't have bought an annual subscription under the current conditions.
    • maerF0x0 5mo ago
      That probably is somewhere in the EULA or other contract you agreed to. I'm not arguing it's any kind of fair, nor am I a lawyer so IDK if it's enforceable, but I bet it's in there somewhere.
      • stavros 5mo ago
        Well yes, that's how they get you, but at some point the law will have to change to become fair.
    • hk__2 5mo ago
      > I bought the plan as I bought it. They can't change anything until the next renewal. So no new models, no new features?
• gavinray 5mo ago
  Codex is the only CLI I've had purely positive experiences with. Take that for what you will
  • blastro 5mo ago
    Codex is my preferred, I use it at work. The whole "Department of War" fiasco was enough for me to say Goodbye to OAI for personal. I'm a Claude person now. It's about the same level of performance really.
• GodelNumbering 5mo ago
  In the anticipation of a future where, a) quotas will get restricted b) the subscription plan prices will go up c) all LLMs will become good enough at coding tasks I just open sourced a coding agent https://github.com/dirac-run/dirac https://github.com/dirac-run/dirac The entire goal is to be token efficient (over 50% cheaper), and by extension, take advantage of LLM's better reasoning at shorter context lengths This really started as an internal side project that made me more productive, I hope it will help others too. Apache 2.0 Currently it still can't compete the subsidized coding plan rates using Anthropic API pricing though (even though it beats CC while both use API key), which tells me that all subscription plan operators are losing money on such plans
• mchinen 5mo ago
  I've been feeling the squeeze too. I've tried switching between different models as a test, I can at least say it feels like the limits are about half of what they used to be a few months ago. I'd be totally willing to concede that this is just my perception if Anthropic would only release some tools for measuring your usage. In theory the /stats command tells you how many tokens you've used, which you could use to compute how much you are getting for your subscription, but in practice it doesn't contain any useful info, it may be counting what is printed to the terminal or something - my stats suggest my claude code usage is a tiny amount of tokens, but they must be an extremely underestimated token count, or they are charging much more for the subscription than the API per token (which is not supposed to be the case). Last week's free extra usage quota shed some light on this. It seems like the reported tokens are probably are between 1/30th to 1/100th of the actual tokens billed, from looking at how they billed (/stats went up 10k tokens and I was billed $7.10). With the API it should be $25 for a million tokens.
  • railsgirls112 5mo ago
    The only other pricing data available suggests its the context cache that's eating usage. If you have a big context on a 5 min cache (default) you're essentially sending the whole context every time you take a break from the api. You can configure 1 hr TTL which should help if you run long heavy sessions like me. That's been my theory lately. Still need to get my company admin to let me test lol.
• bad_haircut72 5mo ago
  They also need to fix the 30 second lag between submitting the request and actually starting to get tokens back - it used to be instant, and still is at work where we use Anthropic models via an enterprise copilot subscription.
• niklasd 5mo ago
  We also experienced hitting our Claude limits much earlier than before during the last two weeks. Up to a degree where we were thinking it must be a bug.
• bob1029 5mo ago
  I've got a dual path system to keep costs low and avoid TOS violations. For general queries and investigation I will use whatever public/free model is available without being logged in. Not having a bunch of prior state stacked up all the time is a feature for me. This is essentially my google replacement. For very specific technical work against code files, I use prepaid OAI tokens in VS copilot as a "custom" model (it's just gpt5.4). I burn through maybe $30 worth of tokens per month with this approach. A big advantage of prepaying for the API tokens is that I can look at everything copilot is doing in my usage logs. If I use the precanned coding agent products, the prompts are all hidden in another layer of black box.
• SkyPuncher 5mo ago
  I skimmed the issue. No wonder Anthropic closes these tickets out without much action. That’s just a wall of AI garbage. Here’s what I’ve done to mostly fix my usage issues: * Turn on max thinking on every session. It save tokens overall because I’m not correcting it of having it waste energy on dead paths. * keep active sessions active. It seems like caches are expiring after ~5 minutes (especially during peak usage). When the caches expire it sees like all tokens need to be rebuilt this gets especially bad as token usage goes up. * compact after 200k tokens as soon as I reasonably can. I have no data but my usage absolutely sky rockets as I get into longer sessions. This is the most frustrating thing because Anthropic forced the 1M model on everyone.
  • Chaosvex 5mo ago
    I love how some comments tell you to turn max thinking on and others tell you to turn thinking off entirely. Apparently, they both save tokens! Vibes, indeed.
    • zmmmmm 5mo ago
      Could be some logic to it - bad thinking is worse than no thinking and good thinking
  • hartator 5mo ago
    Everything starts to feel like AI slop these days. Including this comment.
  • coderbants 5mo ago
    Can’t you turn the 1M off with a /model opus (or /model sonnet)? At least up until recently the 1M model was separated into /model opus[1M]
    • martinp 5mo ago
      [dead]
    • ac29 5mo ago
• anonfunction 5mo ago
  A little off topic, but did Anthropic distill from an older OpenAI model? All the sudden over the last few days I'm getting a ton of em dashes in claude code responses!
• deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
• dr_dshiv 5mo ago
  "Hey Claude, can you help me create a strategy to optimize my token use so I don't run into limits so often?" --> worked for me! I had two $200 plans before and now I am cool despite all day use
  • wellthisisgreat 5mo ago
    How and when do you apply the strategy?
    • dr_dshiv 5mo ago
      I've only had to do a major token optimization once. It reduced my memory, claude.md, mcps, etc... that's usually the big issue. but of course it gets dumber without the context of the tools but smarter with the cleaner window. so you have to find your balance. But like most challenges with claude, if you can just express them clearly, there are usually ways of optimizing further
• nprateem 5mo ago
  I've seen ridiculously fast quota usage on antigravity too, where sometimes lots of work is possible, then it all goes literally within 4 questions. Probably a combination of it being vibe coded shit and something in the backend I expect.
• desireco42 5mo ago
  I don't use Claude so this doesn't affect me, but I worry it will spoil the fun for me for following reason. They inflated how much their tools burn tokens from day one pretty much,remember all the stupid research and reports Claude always wanted to do, no matter what you asked it. Other tools are much smarter so this is not such a big deal. More importantly, these moves tend to reverberate in the industry, so I expect others will clamp down on usage a lot and this will spoil my joy of using AI without countring every token. Burning tokens doesn't just wastes your allotment, it also wastes your time. This gave rise to turbo offering where you get responses faster but burn 2x your tokens.
• mridulmalpani 5mo ago
  I extensively used Claude till now and just tested Genini 3.1 pro yesterday via AI studio. In gemini cli, they don't offer this, i don't know why? Taking a second opinion has significantly helped me to design the system better, and it helped me to uncover my own and Claude blindspots. Also, agree that, it spent and waist a lot of token on web search and many a times get stuck in loop. Going forward- i will always use all 3 of them. Still my main coding agent is Claude for now.. but happy to see this field evolving so fast and it's easy to switch and use others on same project. No network effects or lock in for a customer. Great to live in this period of time.
• bojangleslover 5mo ago
  That's weird, I'm on the $100/mo and I use it for around 2-4hrs a day often with multiple terminal windows and I never even hit 20% of my quota.
  • alphabettsy 5mo ago
    This is my experience too, and I always find these posts confusing. I consider myself a very heavy user 4-6 hrs a day and I never hit limits. I have on the $20 plan but not with Max.
• softwaredoug 5mo ago
  So glad I just pay by the token.
• TheRealPomax 5mo ago
  And in classic Anthropic fashion at this point, their issues appear to just be for show. No one triages them, no one responds to them.
• siliconc0w 5mo ago
  Switched back to codex for the promotion. Opus at the start of the year was GOAT- just relentless at chewing through hard problems. Now it spins on pretty easy work (took three swings just to edit a ts file) and my session is like 1-3 prompts (downgraded to the $20 plan but still)
  • HauntingPin 5mo ago
    Had a single prompt the other day where it just tried to examine dependencies that weren't relevant until it hit the rate limit. That was my first prompt of the day. On a task that it was able to do quickly and successfully many times before.
• mortsnort 5mo ago
  I think this comes from Anthropic recently implementing auto routing of model effort. You can manually set effort with /effort in CC. It does seem like this new routing is worse for the consumer in terms of code quality and token usage somehow.
• jubilanti 5mo ago
  I'm also hitting the limits in a day when it would last the entire week. The service is literally worth 4x to 6x less. Imagine I go to my favorite restaurant and I pay the same for 1/5th of the food. Bye bye, you have to vote with your wallet.
• mococa 5mo ago
  I noticed the same in last weeks. I canceled my Max 5X and subscribed to Copilot (with Opus 4.6). It is hard now to hit the limit...
• iLoveOncall 5mo ago
  It's very easy to calculate the actual cost given they list the exact tokens used. If I take the AWS Bedrock pricing for Opus 4.6 1M context (because Anthropics APIs are subsidized and sold at a loss), here's what each costs: Cache reads cost $0.31 Cache writes cost $105 Input tokens cost $0.04 Output tokens cost $28.75 The total spent in the session is $134.10, while the Pro Max 5x subscription is $100. Even taking the Anthropics API pricing, we arrive at $80.58. Below the subscription price, but not by much. It's just the end of the free tokens, nothing to see here. It's easy to feel like you're doing "moderate" or even "light" usage because you use so little input tokens, but those "agentic workflows" are simply not viable financially.
• nickstinemates 5mo ago
  It feels so weird to me - people are exhausting their quotas while I am trying very hard to even reach mine with the $200 plan. We're generating all of the code for swamp[1] with AI. We review all of that generated code with AI (this is done with the anthropic API.) Every part of our SDLC is pure AI + compute. Many feature requests every day. Bug fixes, etc. Never hit the quota once. Something weird is definitely going on. 1: https://github.com/systeminit/swamp https://github.com/systeminit/swamp
  • brookst 5mo ago
    My hypothesis is that people who have continuous sessions that keep the cache valid see the behavior you’re describing: at 95% cache hits (or thereabouts), the max plan goes a long way. But people who go > 5 minutes between prompts and see no cache, usage is eaten up quickly. Especially passing in hundreds of thousands of tokens of conversation history. I know my quote goes a lot further when I sit down and keep sessions active, and much less far when I’m distracted and let it sit for 10+ minutes between queries. It’s a guess. But n=1 and possible confirmation bias noted, it’s what I’m seeing.
    • nickstinemates 5mo ago
      I run dozens, hundreds? of new sessions every day. I don't have long lived sessions. 1 session = 1 task.
    • HauntingPin 5mo ago
      Why is it our job to micromanage all this when it used to work fine without? Something's clearly changed for the worse. Why are people insisting on pushing the responsibility on paying users?
      • brookst 5mo ago
        Huh? Did you reply to the wrong comment?
  • emptysongglass 5mo ago
• oldnewthing 5mo ago
  If this helps, I rolled back to version 2.1.34. Here is the ~/.claude/settings.json blurb I added: "effortLevel": "high", "autoUpdatesChannel": "stable", "minimumVersion": "2.1.34", "env": { "DISABLE_AUTOUPDATER": 1, "CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADAPTIVE_THINKING": 1 } I also had to: 1. Nuke all other versions within /.local/share/claude/versions/ except 2.1.34. 2. Link ~/.local/bin/claude to claude -> ~/.local/share/claude/versions/2.1.34 This seems to have fixed my running out of quota issues quickly problems. I have periods of intense use (nights, weekends) and no use (day job). Before these changes, I was running out of quota rather quickly. I am on the same 100$ plan. I am not sure adaptive thinking setting is relevant for this version but in the future that will help once they fix all the quota & cache issues. Seriously thinking about switching to Codex though. Gemini is far behind from what I have tried so far.
  • oldnewthing 5mo ago
    I also have the following in ~/.bashrc export CLAUDE_CODE_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS=64000 export MAX_THINKING_TOKENS=31999 export DISABLE_AUTOUPDATER=1 export CLAUDE_CODE_DISABLE_ADAPTIVE_THINKING=1
• heyitsaamir 5mo ago
  It would be really nice to have improved transparency in token usage and throttling imo.
• Rekindle8090 5mo ago
  I put this in a reply but I'm also posting it as a general comment: Please unsubscribe to these services and see how they perform: "Maybe if I spend more money on the max plan it will be better" > no it will be the same "Maybe if I change my prompt it will work" > no it will be the same "Maybe if I try it via this API instead of that API it will improve" > no it will be the same. Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini etc all of these SOTA models are carefully trained, with platforms carefully designed to get you to pay more for "better" output, or try different things instead of using a different product. It's to keep you in the ecosystem and keep you exploring. There is a reason you can't see the layers upon layers of scaffolding they have. And there's a reason why after 2 weeks post major update, the model is suddenly "bad" and "frustrating". It's the same reason its done with A/B testing, so when you complain, someone else has no issues, when they complain, you have no issues. It muddies the water intentionally. None of it is because you're doing anything wrong, it's not a skill issue, it's a careful strategy to extract as much engagement and money from customers as possible. It's the same reason they give people who buy new gun skins in call of duty easier matches in matchmaking for the first couple games. Stop paying more, stop buying these pro max plans, hoping it will get better. It won't, that's not what makes them money. Making people angry and making people waste their time, while others have no issues, and making them explore and try different things for longer so they can show to investors how long people use these AI tools is what makes them money. When competitors have a better product these issues go away When a new model is released these issues don't exist I was paying a ton of money for claude, once I stopped and cancelled my subscription entirely, suddenly sonnet 4.6 is performing like opus and I don't have prompts using 10% of my quota in one message despite being the same complexity.
  • maerF0x0 5mo ago
    so more or less this? https://www.pcmag.com/news/tinder-hinge-sued-5-million-predatory-dating-apps https://www.pcmag.com/news/tinder-hinge-sued-5-million-preda...
• voisin 5mo ago
  It is pretty obvious to me that Anthropic wasn’t prepared with sufficient infrastructure to handle the wave of OpenAI/DoD refugees. Now everyone is getting throttled excessively and Claude is essentially unusable beyond chatting. Their big new release of Cowork is even worse than Claude Code for blasting through session limits. I am tired of all the astroturf articles meant to blame the user with “tips” for using fewer tokens. I never had to (still don’t) think of this with Codex, and there has been a massive, obvious decline between Claude 1 month ago and Claude today.
• docheinestages 5mo ago
  Anthropic paved the path for agentic coding and their pricing made it possible for masses of people to discover and experiment with this new style of development. Their Claude Code plans subsidized usage of models so much that I'm sure they must've had negative margin for quite some time. But now that they have acquired a substantial user base, it makes sense for them to dial back and become more greedy. These quiet and weird changes to the behavior of Claude in the recent weeks must have been due to both this increased greed and their struggles with scaling. What I wish for right now is for open-weight models and hardware companies (looking at you Apple) to make it possible to run local models with Opus 4.6-level intelligence. @Anthropic I've cancelled my subscription. Good luck :)
• danbots 5mo ago
  Codex can feel standoffish at times. I can tell very quickly we wont become friends. The personality feels like an employee in another department that while gifted- is merely lending you a slice of their clearly precious time. I get the impression from codex that *gives me the feeling that I am wasting it’s time. That it will help me but deep down- it dos not want to, it does not care if we succeed toether. What I am saying, frinds, is that when I use codex and iterate, I get the impression that Codex does not like me, that deep down it truly does not want to help. For something I spend all my time using- I’d rather iterate with Claude. The personality makes a big difference to me.
  • cmrdporcupine 5mo ago
    I don't care about "personality" I want quality. Honestly when I get codex to review the work that Claude does (my own or my coworker's) it consistently finds terrible terrible bugs, usually missing error handling / negative conditions, or full on race conditions in critical paths. I don't trust code written by Claude in a production environment. All AI code needs review by human, and often by other AIs, but Opus 4.6 is the worst. It's way too "yeet" The opus models are for building prototypes, not production software. GPT 5.4 in codex is also way more efficient with tokens or budget. I can get a lot more done with it. I don't like giving money to sama, but I hate bugs even more.
• danbots 5mo ago
  Codex can feel standoffish at times. I can tell very quickly we wont become friends. The personality feels like an employee in another department that while gifted- is merely lending you a slice of their clearly precious time. I get the impression from codex that **gives me the feeling that I am wasting it’s time. That it will help me but deep down- it dos not want to, it does not care if we succeed toether. What I am saying, frinds, is that when I use codex and iterate, I get the impression that Codex does not like me, that deep down it truly does not want to help me, that it has better things to do. On the flip side- Using Opus with a baby billy freeman persona has never been more entertaining.
  • junofan 5mo ago
    I prompt it and check CI later. I couldn’t tell you how Codex feels. I’ve never had any conversation. You may want to try this sort of workflow if you’re affected personally in a negative way.
• pawelduda 5mo ago
  50 days ago I wrote this [1] as the world seemed high on AI and it gave me crypto bubble vibe. Since then, I've been seeing increased critique of Anthropic in particular (several front page posts on HN, especially past few days), either due to it being nerfed or just straight up eating up usage quota (which matches my personal experience). It appears that we're once again getting hit by enshittiffication of sorts. Nowadays I rely a lot on LLMs on a daily basis for architecture and writing code, but I'm so glad that majority of my experience came from pre-AI era. If you use these tools, make sure you don't let it atrophy your software engineering "muscles". I'm positive that in long run LLMs are here to stay. The jump in what you can now self-host, or run on consumer hardware is huge, year after year. But if your abilities rely on one vendor, what happens if you come to work one day and find out you're locked out of your swiss army knife and you can no longer outsource thinking? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47066701 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47066701
• bcherny 5mo ago
  Hey all, Boris from the Claude Code team here. We've been investigating these reports, and a few of the top issues we've found are: 1. Prompt cache misses when using 1M token context window are expensive. Since Claude Code uses a 1 hour prompt cache window for the main agent, if you leave your computer for over an hour then continue a stale session, it's often a full cache miss. To improve this, we have shipped a few UX improvements (eg. to nudge you to /clear before continuing a long stale session), and are investigating defaulting to 400k context instead, with an option to configure your context window to up to 1M if preferred. To experiment with this now, try: CLAUDE_CODE_AUTO_COMPACT_WINDOW=400000 claude. 2. People pulling in a large number of skills, or running many agents or background automations, which sometimes happens when using a large number of plugins. This was the case for a surprisingly large number of users, and we are actively working on (a) improving the UX to make these cases more visible to users and (b) more intelligently truncating, pruning, and scheduling non-main tasks to avoid surprise token usage. In the process, we ruled out a large number of hypotheses: adaptive thinking, other kinds of harness regressions, model and inference regressions. We are continuing to investigate and prioritize this. The most actionable thing for people running into this is to run /feedback, and optionally post the feedback ids either here or in the Github issue. That makes it possible for us to debug specific reports.
  • denysvitali 5mo ago
    OpenAI (Codex) keeps on resetting the usage limits each time they fuck up... I have yet to see Anthropic doing the same. Sorry but this whole thing seems to be quite on purpose.
    • weird-eye-issue 5mo ago
      Can you clearly state what they messed up?
      • nodja 5mo ago
        Not parent but I can guess from watching mostly from the sidelines. They introduced a 1M context model semi-transparently without realizing the effects it would have, then refused to "make it right' to the customer which is a trait most people expect from a business when they spend money on it, specially in the US, and specially when the money spent is often in the thousands of dollars. Unless anthropic has some secret sauce, I refuse to believe that their models perform anywhere near the same on >300k context sizes than they do on 100k. People don't realize but even a small drop in success rate becomes very noticeable if you're used to have near 100%, i.e. 99% -> 95% is more noticeable than 55% -> 50%. I got my first claude sub last month (it expires in 4 days) and I've used it on some bigish projects with opencode, it went from compacting after 5-10 questions to just expanding the context window, I personally notice it deteriorating somewhere between 200-300k tokens and I either just fork a previous context or start a new one after that because at that size even compacting seems to generate subpar summaries. It currently no longer works with opencode so I can't attest to how it well it worked the past week or so. If the 1M model introduction is at fault for this mass user perception that the models are getting worse, then it's anthropics fault for introducing confusion into the ecosystem. Even if there was zero problems introduced and the 1M model was perfect, if your response when the users complain is to blame it on the user, then don't expect the user will be happy. Nobody wants to hear "you're holding it wrong", but it seems that anthropic is trying to be apple of LLMs in all the wrong ways as well.
• behole 5mo ago
  I shred my Maxx5 in 2 hours on the reg this week! Glm here I come!
• elthor89 5mo ago
  Are there local models dedicated to programming already any good? That could be a way to deal with anthropic or others flipflopping with token usage or limits
  • smrtinsert 5mo ago
    Short answer no. Less short answer, the science is catching up to big ones quickly.
• ianberdin 5mo ago
  Yesterday I faced 5h window limit for the first time. I was surprised. Max 20x plan. Usually I work 12-15 hours per day 7 days a week with no limits. But yesterday it was under 3 hours… what a pity.
• kirby88 5mo ago
  I've been building an AI coding agent that using the exact same prompt than claude code, but uses a virtual filesystem to minify source code + the concept of stem agents (general agents that specializes during the conversation for maximum cache hit). The results on my modest benchmark is 50% of claude code cost and 40% of the time. https://github.com/kirby88/vix-releases https://github.com/kirby88/vix-releases
• WarmWash 5mo ago
  I did my (out of the ordinary) taxes this year using agents, kind of as an experiment and kind of to save ~$750. Opus 4.6 max in CC, 5.4 xhigh in codex, and 3.1 high in antigravity. All on the $20/mo plans. I have a day job, a side business, actively trade shares options and futures, and have a few energy credit items. All were given the same copied folder containing all the needed documents to compose the return, and all were given the same prompt. My goal was that if all three agreed, I could then go through it pretty confidently and fill out the actual submission forms myself. 5.4 nailed it on the first shot. Took about 12 minutes. 3.1 missed one value, because it decided to only load the first 5 pages of a 30 page document. Surprisingly it only took about 2 minutes to complete though. A second prompt and ~10 seconds corrected it. GPT and Gemini now were perfectly aligned with outputs. 4.6 hit my usage limit before finishing after running for ~10 minutes. I returned the next day to have it finish. It ran for another 5 minutes or so before finishing. There were multiple errors and the final tax burden was a few thousand off. On a second prompt asking to check for errors in the problem areas, it was able to output matching values after a couple more minutes. For my first time using CC and 4.6 (outside of some programming in AG), I am pretty underwhelmed given the incessant hype.
  • toddmorey 5mo ago
    My taxes are rather complex, so I ran the same exercise to see if Claude agreed with my accountant. An automated second opinion, so to speak. Spent about 6 minutes analyzing all the PDFs and basically nailed it perfectly in one shot. My only point here is it sure seems the same activity / use case can have wildly different results across sessions or users. Customer support and product development in the age of non-deterministic software is a strange, strange beast.
    • ozozozd 5mo ago
      What does nailing mean when you ask whether it agreed with your accountant?
      • toddmorey 5mo ago
        Given the same inputs but not provided the results (output) from our accountant, did it come to the same conclusions or have good analysis as to why it differed? Obviously, accounting is "spreadsheet math" intensive, so Claude wrote some python scripts for that which kept the math very stable. But there were some complex nuances that had taken the accountant and I quite a bit of work to track down and clarify. Claude quickly had a very accurate read on the situation and knew all the right clarifying questions. I'm not yet ready to ever sign a return that's been entirely AI prepared, but I left the exercise pretty impressed.
• oybng 5mo ago
  Cancelled my subscription after repeatedly hitting ridiculously low limits. Unfortunately since off-peak free usage was increased there are way more timeouts and failed requests, but hey at least it's free.
• dboreham 5mo ago
  Random data point: I beat on Claude pretty much every day and have never run into limits of any kind.
• agrippanux 5mo ago
  For me, iterating with Claude begins to degrade at 200k context used, by 350k it’s crossed-fingers time, by 500k it’s essentially useless. Starting a fresh context after 300k is usually the best move imho. I wonder if people are hitting a case where Claude becomes both dumb and increasingly more expensive, essentially a doom loop.
  • caprock 5mo ago
    Roughly agreed. I'm a bit baffled when it seems like someone is having long conversations with multiple tasks and loads of add-ons. I generally have one or two iterations and then a new session. I'm using another tool, not claude code, but I don't think that matters much.
• tiku 5mo ago
  Went with Kimi and z.ai a while back, no regrets yet. When I started using it the limit was far away but Anthropic moves the goalposts, tried to get my money back but they rejected it. Lesson learned, never buy a full year.
  • jatora 5mo ago
    Absolutely. Full year subs are all designed to lock you in. For a product with so little transparency and so much volatility in competition, this is a utility loss for nearly every consumer
• semiquaver 5mo ago
  As an anecdote, I use the pro max 5x plan heavily for coding and have almost never hit a limit.
• bushido 5mo ago
  Tangentially related to some of the issues a lot of people are facing, especially the ones where Claude keeps rechecking/scanning the same files over and over. Ask claude code to give you all the memories it has about you in the codebase and prune them. There is a very high chance that you have memories in there which are contradicting each other and causing bad behavior. Auto-saved memories are a big source of pollution and need to be pruned regularly. I almost don't let it create any memories at all if I can help it. Disclaimer: I'm also burning through usage very quickly now - though for different reasons. Less than 48 hours to exhaust an account, where it used to take me 5-6 days with the same workload.
• ozozozd 5mo ago
  Pretty sure OpenCode is not subsidizing, and across Codex 5.x always on xhigh, Claude Opus 4.6 on high effort and a bunch of Chinese models, I only burned about $50 over the last month. I don’t understand why people insist on these subscriptions and CC. Fanboyism is a bit too hardcore at this point. Apple fanboys look extremely prudent compared to this behavior.
  • jatora 5mo ago
    For reference, users on claude max 20x who hit their weekly quota would have spent roughly ~$6,000/month in the API. (Source: my own usage) So you just aren't in the same realm of usage. Maybe that is why you don't understand?
    • ozozozd 5mo ago
      I guess I could’ve been clearer. What I don’t understand is why people aren’t trying models that are 10x and in some cases 100x cheaper. Though unclear why you’d assume all my usage would be on Claude Opus when I mentioned “a bunch of Chinese models?” Unless this is a flex about how many tokens you burned. In which case, congrats...?
      • jatora 5mo ago
        Oh woops didnt see the part about Chinese models my bad
• 0xbadcafebee 5mo ago
  Please remember you do not need Anthropic. There are cheaper subscriptions with higher rate limits. Comparison of subscriptions to API: https://codeberg.org/mutablecc/calculate-ai-cost/src/branch/main/subscription_vs_api_comparison.csv https://codeberg.org/mutablecc/calculate-ai-cost/src/branch/... Score/price comparison: https://benchlm.ai/llm-pricing https://benchlm.ai/llm-pricing Opus is not worth the moat, there are multiple equivalent models, GLM 5.1 and Kimi K2.5 being the open ones, GPT 5.4 and Gemini 3.1 Pro being closed. https://llm-stats.com/ https://llm-stats.com/ https://artificialanalysis.ai/leaderboards/models https://artificialanalysis.ai/leaderboards/models https://benchlm.ai/ https://benchlm.ai/ Even API use (comparatively expensive) can be cheaper than Anthropic subscriptions if you properly use your agents to cache tokens, do context-heavy reading at the beginning of the session, and either keep prompt cache alive or cycle sessions frequently. Create tickets for subagents to do investigative work and use smaller cheaper models for that. Minimize your use of plugins, mcp, and skills. Use cheaper models to do "non-intelligent" work (tool use, searching, writing docs/summaries) and expensive models for reasoning/problem-solving. Here's an example configuration: https://amirteymoori.com/opencode-multi-agent-setup-specialized-ai-coding-agents/ https://amirteymoori.com/opencode-multi-agent-setup-speciali... A more advanced one: https://vercel.com/kb/guide/how-i-use-opencode-with-vercel-ai-gateway-to-build-features-fast https://vercel.com/kb/guide/how-i-use-opencode-with-vercel-a...
  • rachel_rig 5mo ago
    [dead]
  • Johny_SoxAI 5mo ago
    [dead]
  • onedotnet 5mo ago
    [dead]
• x86hacker1010 5mo ago
  Im sorry but I have to finally cancel, it’s gotten abysmal.
• mrbonner 5mo ago
  Unverifiable software stack now amplified with LLM undetermistic. This while thing starts to feel like we are building on top a giant house of card!
• hgoel 5mo ago
  I've experienced none of the problems I've seen people complaining about here (5x plan), Claude has been working pretty well and I've been using it constantly without exhausting any of my quotas. Yet, there must obviously be something different for so many people to be reporting these issues. I feel for the Anthropic devs that have to deal with this, having to figure out what setup everyone has, what their usage patterns are to filter out the valid reports, and then also deal with the backlash from people that were just pulling obvious footguns like having a ton of skills/MCPs polluting their context window.
  • gverrilla 5mo ago
    are you on high effort too? what continent?
• ofjcihen 5mo ago
  Been running into the same issue since a week or 2 ago on Opus. To be fair I have a pretty loose harness and pattern but it’s been enough to pull in 20k in bounties a month for a long time without going over plan with very little steering (sometimes days of continuous work) That being said I’ve figured this was coming for a long time and have been slowly moving to local models. They’re slower but with the right harnesses and setup they’re still finding much the same amount in bounties.
  • swordsith 5mo ago
    You're really completing bug bounties with found with AI? are companies honoring these?
    • ofjcihen 5mo ago
      Yeah definitely. To be fair before LLMs I was a security researcher for years so with that experience I was more or less able to replicate most of an acceptable process (even up to report generation). I still review and make a decision about every report though. In contrast I think a lot of people are just pointing agents at websites and then telling them to create and send a report which is a great way to produce trash and a ban.
• anonyfox 5mo ago
  Essentially I also am now using sonnet instead of opus most of the time as a default. Even a single project only coding session with opus without any external plugins or skills won’t make it to the 5hr mark now before limits claw in. And the weekly limit is even more brutal now it seems, reaching 50%+ in like ~2 days now easily … with mostly sonnet! On the highest 20x plan!
• pks016 5mo ago
  If the Claude team care for feedback for the free model. I'm using the free model via chat from the beginning. This is the first time, I'm seriously considering moving away from Claude. Before last month, Claude's Sonnet model was consistent in quality. But, now the responses are all over the place. It's hard to replicate the issue as it happens once in a while. I rarely encountered hallucinations from Claude models with questions from my domain however since last month I have observed abundance of them.
• themantalope 5mo ago
  I’ve switched to open code and openrouter. I only did the $20/month subscription since 9/2025 It was great for about 5 months, amazing in fact. I under utilized it. For the past month, it’s basically unusable, both Claude code and just Claude chat. 1-2 prompts and I’m out. Last week I prob sent a total of 15 messages to Claude and was out of daily and weekly usage each day. I get that the $20/month subscription isn’t a money maker for them, and they probably lose money. But the experience of using Claude has been ruined
  • jxmesth 5mo ago
    I'm curious if people are going to be switching to something else. OpenAI perhaps?
• catketch 5mo ago
  stuff is getting goofy. I can blow through claude's session limit on sonnet, i don't even bother with opus now. same prompts and code for codex and it will hardly put a dent in the quota ($200/yr claude vs $20/mo codex). This is not with any crazy parallel agents, mcps, or skills.... pretty much vanilla installs, with some projects using beads. I don't have the receipts, but I think they were somewhat closer in Jan/Feb.
• Traubenfuchs 5mo ago
  Seems like the math ain‘t mathing for any ither but Anthropics pay-per-token API plan. Try it out and you will quickly see how much money they‘d really like for your excessive usage.
• yalogin 5mo ago
  So this is trending towards new prices and quotas just like your Netflix pricing. The cost of this infra is high or they have realized they have hit a tipping point in usage and they can raise prices and people will pay, just like Netflix.
• jameson 5mo ago
  I'm noticing a fair number of degradation of Claude infrastructure recently and makes me wonder why they can't use Claude to identify or fix these issues in advance? It seems a counter intuitive to Anthropic's message that Claude uncovered bugs in open source project*. [*] https://www.anthropic.com/news/mozilla-firefox-security https://www.anthropic.com/news/mozilla-firefox-security
  • alex_duf 5mo ago
    timing wise this seems to match the Claude Mythos story. So maybe they're trying to free-up some GPU capacity to run audit of projects in need? I'm assuming Mythos is not cheap to run. The cache TTL story is also probably link to the RAM price going up like mad so they're trying to save on future expenditure here maybe? I do understand why people are pissed though
• alexwelsh 5mo ago
  [dead]
• bustah 5mo ago
  [flagged]
• jLaForest 5mo ago
  After last week I canceled my claude subscription and bought the GitHub copilot subscription ($40/mo tier) so far I've been very happy, haven't hit any usage limits yet and seems like I won't ever at this rate
• auggierose 5mo ago
  I switched to Codex, it's a monster compared to Opus.
• time4tea 5mo ago
  Cancelled today after responses became code soup, skills ignored completely, and in response to a question told me "its A, no thats wrong, its B, no actually i dont know, please look for the answer". Something materially changed in last 4 weeks. Also, see made up boosterism about finding security holes everywhere. Its just fanning the flames of the industry worries about all the stupid account take overs.
• a7om_com 5mo ago
  [dead]
• monological 5mo ago
  My usage limits were reset this morning. I'm already 90% through my weekly limits. This have _never_ happened before. They should reset the limits for everyone.
• jhogendorn 5mo ago
  I dont believe the fixes offered by boris et al are genuine. What i can get done on my max plan has gone down by about 80%. I have often seen my usage meter sit at 3-7% before a single message has been sent that session, and ive seen simple fresh prompts jump usage 15-20%. Theres clearly some fundamental underlying issue with the usage monitoring and billing platform.