4 ms·
I would not use this if you are on a subscription. In <8min it burned my entire 5hr window (which has just reset it appears, I have over 4 hours till it resets)
by joshstrange 4mo ago
I would not use this if you are on a subscription. In <8min it burned my entire 5hr window (which has just reset it appears, I have over 4 hours till it resets) I hadn't used CC at all today aside from this) and then it used up ~$15 more in usage before I could stop it.
I am on the $100 Max plan.
- enraged_camel 4mo agoThat’s odd, I used it on a pretty complex refactoring task and it worked for 22 mins and used only 15% of my 5-hour limit. I’m on the $200 Max plan though.
- treenutlog 4mo ago[dead]
- FireBeyond 4mo agoWell the $200 Max plan is 4x the usage quotas of the $100 so it's "within reason"?
- fastball 4mo agoWhat is your effort level?
- ZunarJ5 4mo agoThey didn't even reset credits for this lol
- cortesoft 4mo agoThe CLI when you select it says it has 2x the usage as opus. Not sure if that matches what you are seeing. I do wonder if you switched models mid-session, you would have lost all your cache. Reloading the context into cache can really eat through your usage.
- GoToRO 4mo agothey have a graph with cost comparison between the models. This model is just a little over the other models as cost. The graph is logarithmic :)
- observer987 4mo agoI too am on the $100 plan and I second this. I had it analyze a project I was working on with Opus 4.8, and it blew through 23% of my session limit in one go. Does not portend well for my budget.
- d4rkp4ttern 4mo agoYes, and this is also why I haven’t yet tried the new “dynamic workflows” which spawn hundreds of agents that happily eat through your token limits.
- velcrovan 4mo agoI'm also on the $100 max plan. I let Fable rip on a complicated issue involving hot-reloading modules in a GUI app built with Racket, it's fixed a couple issues over the last hour, and I've used about 17% of my session (not weekly) limit.