Home · Guides · Claude vs Codex limits
Claude vs Codex: whose usage limits treat you better?
Both agents meter you with the same two-layer scheme — a 5-hour window plus a weekly cap — but they count consumption differently, reset differently, and fail differently. Side by side:
Checked: July 13, 2026The two systems, one table
| Claude Code (Anthropic) | Codex (OpenAI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Short window | 5-hour rolling, starts at first message | 5-hour rolling temporarily lifted since Jul 2026 |
| Weekly cap | Fixed per-account reset time | Resets 7 days after first message of the week |
| Unit of counting | Opaque "usage" (model-, length- and cache-weighted) | Credits per token, rate depends on model (~5× spread) |
| Model-specific budget | Separate weekly Opus limit on Max | No separate budget — heavier model just burns credits faster |
| Shared with chat product | Yes — claude.ai eats the same budget | Codex quota is its own bucket within the ChatGPT plan |
| Pay to continue | /usage-credits, API rates (Pro/Max) | Buy credits / auto top-up (Plus and up; not Free/Go) |
| Entry price with agent access | $20 (Pro) | $0 (Free/Go, reduced) / $20 (Plus) |
| Check remaining | /usage, Settings → Usage | /status, codex/settings/usage |
Which gives more work per dollar?
Unanswerable in general — and anyone giving you a flat answer is guessing. Both vendors moved limits three-plus times in 2026 (Anthropic doubled 5-hour windows in May and is running a weekly boost right now; OpenAI lifted the 5-hour limit entirely after the GPT-5.6 Sol launch). The honest heuristics:
- On the OpenAI side, model choice is the big lever — the credit spread between models is ~5×, so dropping to a mid-tier model for routine work stretches the week dramatically.
- On the Anthropic side, the Opus budget is the scarce resource — Sonnet headroom is much deeper, so reserving Opus for hard problems is the equivalent lever.
- Promotions are real but dated — never plan capacity around a boost that expires next week.
The two-provider workflow
A growing pattern (ask any "what do I do now that I'm rate-limited" thread): run both subscriptions, treat them as one pool of agent-hours. One hits a wall mid-task — you hand the branch to the other. $40/month for Claude Pro + ChatGPT Plus buys more effective throughput than $100 on either single plan, at the cost of one annoyance: you now have four quotas to track (two windows × two providers), in two different UIs, with two different reset schedules.
That bookkeeping is the entire reason AI Status Bar exists: every account of both providers in one menu, each with its 5-hour and weekly percentage and reset clock, with alerts before either wall. The switch decision becomes a glance.
FAQ
Can I use one subscription's quota from the other tool?
No — quotas are per-vendor and per-account. The two-provider workflow means two subscriptions; what you pool is your own workflow, not the billing.
Which one should I subscribe to first?
Whichever agent you prefer working with — limits shouldn't drive that choice at $20. The two-provider setup is for when you're already hitting one vendor's weekly cap regularly.
Do both really use a 5-hour window?
Yes, it's convergent design — though as of July 2026 OpenAI has temporarily suspended theirs, leaving only the weekly cap. Expect it back.