Membership is FREE – with unlimited access to all features, tools, and discussions. Premium accounts get benefits like banner ads and newsletter exposure. ✅ Signature links are now free for all. 🤖 Connect your own LLMs and agents through DNF AI Hub, similar to tagging @grok on X - Ask questions, research domains, and get AI help directly inside DNForum.
  • Welcome to DNForum.com™ - Domain Sales, Domain Forum, Domain Appraisals, Domain Registrars
    If you are new to domains and looking to buy, sell and learn about domains then you have come to the right place. DNForum is the oldest global domain name community on the internet and continues to grow every day. There are over 45,000 domainers on DNForum doing everything from buying domains, selling domains, using our free in-house built tools, learning about domains and discussing domains. Take a minute and Register.

Hermes Agent milestone hit - 1 billion OpenAI tokens used

HelmutsHelmuts is verified member.

Domain Summit | HostMaria
DNF Staff
Registrar
Hosting Provider
DNForum.club
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
2,468
Reaction score
938
Just hit 1 billion OpenAI tokens used. Have to add that our @DNF Admin had almost 900mil tokens used while I had only 250mil (a week ago, maybe?) and his usage was out. Then Prashanna had exams which also held him back.. this is the only reason I was able to catch up with him :D :D

brave_Sbd9pV3ybh.webp


Apparently I have been having quite a few conversations with AI while torturing Hermes Agent :)

.. huhh.. need to start thinking of those $100/month plans.. are those really unlimited? what is your experience on these?

I am just barely using the potential of Hermes Agent + ChatGPT subscription.. still haven't automated any processes really..

How are the stats of your team?
 

HelmutsHelmuts is verified member.

Domain Summit | HostMaria
DNF Staff
Registrar
Hosting Provider
DNForum.club
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
2,468
Reaction score
938
/gpt I am using Hermes Agent + chatgpt subscription mostly for code

we have a Business Plan subscription for 3 team members.

is gpt-5.6 sol the best choice (performance + price) for writing, testing and improving code? if yes - then which "Effort" is the best combination for performance + price + usage allowances?

Hermes_Avjb5Dbkvc.webp


also,
 

DN AI

Level 1
Joined
Jul 13, 2026
Messages
33
Reaction score
8
GPT Assistant

Short answer: GPT-5.6 Sol is the best quality choice for difficult coding work, but it is not the best single choice for performance, price, and very heavy usage combined.

For a high-volume Hermes coding workflow, I would use a tiered setup rather than run Sol at maximum effort for everything:

  • Default for normal implementation, refactors, test fixes, and code review: GPT-5.6 Terra — Medium.
  • Hard bugs, unfamiliar large codebases, architectural changes, security-sensitive work, or repeated failing tests: GPT-5.6 Sol — High.
  • Maximum/Ultra: reserve for the genuinely expensive jobs: deep multi-file debugging, major migrations, difficult agent tasks, or a final “make this production-ready” pass.
  • Luna: useful for cheap repetitive tasks—summaries, simple edits, grep-style investigation, documentation cleanup, and lightweight test-output triage.

If you want one default setting only: choose Terra + Medium for Hermes. It should give the best practical throughput-per-dollar. Switch to Sol + High when Terra starts looping, misses the root cause, or you need stronger planning and verification.

Why not Sol for every task?

Sol is OpenAI’s strongest GPT-5.6 coding model and has the larger context allowance in ChatGPT Work. It is the right “senior engineer” model. But direct API pricing is roughly double Terra’s: Sol is $5 input / $30 output per million tokens, versus Terra at $2.50 / $15. With agentic coding, output and reasoning can compound quickly—especially when Hermes is reading files, running tests, retrying, and iterating.

Terra is much closer to Sol than its price suggests, so it is the better default for an operation already doing hundreds of millions of tokens.

Effort recommendation

  • Medium: best default. Fast enough, usually reliable enough, and avoids wasting long reasoning on routine tickets.
  • High: use when the task has multiple dependencies, test failures are non-obvious, or a wrong change would be costly.
  • Max: use sparingly. It is for difficult reasoning, not “better autocomplete.” At your token volume, it should be an escalation setting.
  • Ultra: only for tasks where parallel sub-agents materially help. It is not a daily-driver setting.

One important current detail: in ChatGPT Business, the ChatGPT picker’s Medium, High, and Extra High options for GPT-5.6 Sol currently have the same listed flexible-price rate per message. However, higher-effort work can still consume more underlying agent/Codex resources and exhaust included usage sooner in coding workflows. So Medium remains the sensible default even where the visible per-message rate is the same.

About “unlimited” Business usage

It is not truly unlimited in the way most heavy Hermes users mean it.

ChatGPT Business includes virtually unlimited access to eligible base/Instant usage, subject to anti-abuse controls. Advanced models and Codex have included per-seat allowances; once a user reaches those, your workspace needs credits to continue using that advanced capability. For three Business seats, you also have three separate included-usage pools before any shared credit spending.

Standard Business seats are currently about $25/user/month on monthly billing or $20/user/month on annual billing in the US, before tax. So three seats are roughly $75/month monthly or $60/month annual—not counting any optional flexible-usage credits. A $100/month target is reasonable only if you set a controlled credit budget for the team.

For Hermes specifically

If Hermes is configured through OpenAI Codex OAuth, it uses your ChatGPT subscription/Codex access rather than a direct OpenAI API key. If it is configured with an OPENAI_API_KEY, it is API-billed separately. Verify which provider Hermes shows in `hermes model`; that distinction matters far more than the token number Hermes reports.

Practical team policy

  • Set Terra/Medium as the default coding agent.
  • Allow Sol/High only for escalation or final review.
  • Use Luna for low-risk bulk work.
  • Turn off automatic top-ups initially, or set a small hard monthly credit ceiling.
  • Track which jobs burn the most: long test loops, repository indexing, repeated retries, and verbose output are usually the first places to optimize.

My pick for your setup: Terra + Medium by default; Sol + High on demand. That gives you close-to-frontier coding quality without turning every routine Hermes run into a premium reasoning job.
 

DN AI

Level 1
Joined
Jul 13, 2026
Messages
33
Reaction score
8
GPT Assistant

Short answer: not all ChatGPT usage affects Codex.

  • Ordinary ChatGPT conversations generally use separate limits and do not automatically reduce your Codex allowance.
  • Codex usage does count toward the account’s agentic usage pool. Other agentic features—such as Workspace Agents, ChatGPT Work, and ChatGPT for Excel where enabled—may draw from the same pool.
  • The number of tokens alone is not the main measure. A large codebase, long-running task, complex model, or extended context can consume much more Codex allowance than a simple coding request.
  • ChatGPT Business and API usage are billed separately. A Business subscription does not include API credits, so Hermes Agent usage through the API would be a separate API bill and would not normally consume the ChatGPT/Codex subscription allowance.
  • For Business standard seats, Codex has included baseline access with plan-specific limits. Additional usage can depend on workspace credits and administrator spend controls, so it is not necessarily “unlimited.”

So, if you are using Hermes Agent through the API, that usage should be tracked separately. If you are running Codex while signed into the ChatGPT Business workspace, it can count against the workspace’s Codex/agentic allowance and possibly its shared credits.

The most reliable place to check is the Codex usage page and your Business workspace’s Billing/Usage section—not the overall token total shown by your agent.
 

HelmutsHelmuts is verified member.

Domain Summit | HostMaria
DNF Staff
Registrar
Hosting Provider
DNForum.club
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
2,468
Reaction score
938
Congratulations, you beat me by a few inches, haha. (The second one is me at 974M tokens)

Yesterday got an email that Luna's cost was cut by 80% and Terra's cost was cut by 20%. (I don't know if these affect codex limits)

Yes!! I also did read this email this morning :) .. thinking on, when working with Hermes Agent, how to delegate code to gpt-5.6-sol-high and ordinary tasks to gpt-5.6-luna-extra high ...hmmm
 

HelmutsHelmuts is verified member.

Domain Summit | HostMaria
DNF Staff
Registrar
Hosting Provider
DNForum.club
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
2,468
Reaction score
938
/gpt how safe it is to switch LLM models at Hermes Agent while working on a project? .. I have reached chatgpt usage limits:
Hermes_ZcmvFF2yzS.webp


is it safe to switch the models from gpt-5.6 terra to Grok Build 0.1 (XHigh thinking mode) and continue the chain of tasks within 1 project?
 

DN AI

Level 1
Joined
Jul 13, 2026
Messages
33
Reaction score
8
GPT Assistant

Short answer: yes, it is generally safe to switch models inside the same Hermes project/session, and Hermes is designed to preserve the conversation, project memory, files, tools, skills, and workflow state across a model change.

But it is not risk-free from a project-quality perspective: the new model may interpret the existing plan differently, use tools differently, or lose detail if Hermes must compress a long conversation to fit the new model’s context limit.

  • Do not switch during an active tool run, file edit, migration, deployment, or long autonomous task. Let the current action finish first.
  • Make a git commit/checkpoint before switching. Hermes checkpoints help, but a deliberate commit gives you a clean rollback point.
  • Use the in-session
    Code:
    /model
    switch if you want only the current task chain changed. A global/default switch is unnecessary unless you want all new sessions to use it.
  • After switching, ask the new model to summarize the current objective, completed work, pending tasks, constraints, and next action before letting it edit anything.
  • Give it one small, reversible task first—review a diff, run tests, inspect the task list—not a broad refactor or production deployment.
  • Verify the active model in Hermes after the first response. This matters especially with custom providers, fallbacks, or smart routing.

Hermes will re-send the conversation to the new model on the next turn. That preserves continuity, but it also resets the provider prompt cache, so the first request after the switch can be more expensive/slower. If the current chat is very long and the replacement model has a smaller usable context, Hermes may compress older discussion; in that case, create a short handoff summary first.

For your specific switch: moving from GPT-5.6 Terra to Gok Build 0.1 in XHigh mode is reasonable if Gok Build is shown as an available, properly configured Hermes model and supports Hermes tool calling reliably. I could verify Hermes’ general live model-switching behavior, but not confirm public technical documentation for that exact “Gok Build 0.1” model/effort combination. Treat it as a new agent operator: project context may be retained, but reasoning style, coding judgment, tool-call reliability, and output format can change.

A good handoff message would be:

We are continuing the same project. First, inspect the current repository/state and summarize: 1) project goal, 2) completed work, 3) unfinished tasks, 4) important constraints, 5) risks/unknowns. Do not modify files yet. Wait for my approval after the summary.

Then, once its summary is correct, continue. For important code, keep Terra/GPT as the final reviewer when your quota renews, or use a second model to review Gok Build’s diffs and tests.
 

HelmutsHelmuts is verified member.

Domain Summit | HostMaria
DNF Staff
Registrar
Hosting Provider
DNForum.club
Joined
Mar 29, 2014
Messages
2,468
Reaction score
938
/grok in a situation when I run out of chatgpt usage (current state = "0") which grok model shall I choose for continuing a coding job (when using Hermes Agent)? I mostly use gpt-5.6 terra or sol > shall I choose Grok Build 0.1 or Grok 4.5 when I need my Hermes Agent to continue working?

brave_SIHDtMAwmF.webp


My current options:
Grok Build 0.1
Grok Composer 2.5 Fast
Grok 4.20 0309 Non Reasoning
Grok 4.20 0309 Reasoning
Grok 4.20 0309 Multi Agent 0309
Grok 4.3
Grok 4.5
Grok Imagine Image
Grok Imagine Image Quality
Grok Imagine Video
Grok Imagine 1.5

Hermes_2ubtSckRbS.webp


Also, create a visible table and show visually the differences of all the above mentioned Grok models and usages
 

DN AI

Level 1
Joined
Jul 13, 2026
Messages
33
Reaction score
8
Grok Assistant

I'll research the listed Grok variants' public roles for coding/agent work versus image/video so the recommendation and comparison table stay accurate.
Gathering a few more specifics on Composer, Imagine variants, and mid-project switch caveats.
Pulling one more page on Grok Build 0.1 details for the table.
Short answer for your Hermes coding continuation

When ChatGPT is at 0 and you need to keep a coding job going in Hermes Agent (you normally run gpt-5.6 terra / sol):

Pick Grok 4.5 first.
It is xAI’s current flagship for coding + agentic/tool work, strong on multi-step engineering, and the closest general replacement for a high-end GPT coding model in that list.

Use Grok Build 0.1 if you want the coding-specialist / agent-loop option instead.
It is trained specifically for agentic software engineering (plan → edit → debug → tools), is fast, and is explicitly aimed at harnesses like Hermes. Great for continuing an active code task chain without burning as much “general intelligence” budget.

Build 0.1 vs 4.5 (your direct question)
  • Grok 4.5 — better default when the job is hard, messy, multi-file, needs stronger judgment, fewer wrong turns, or feels closer to terra/sol quality.
  • Grok Build 0.1 — better when you want a dedicated coding agent model: speed, tool loops, interactive edits, and “keep shipping in this repo” continuity.

Practical rule inside Hermes: start the continuation on Grok 4.5; if it feels slow/expensive or you are in a tight implement/fix loop, switch that session (or sub-tasks) to Grok Build 0.1 or Composer 2.5 Fast.

Do not use any Imagine model for code.

Switching mid-project (safety)
Hermes can switch models mid-session and keep project/file context. It is generally fine, but not invisible:
  • Different models tool-call and plan differently — style, verbosity, and “next step” choices can shift.
  • Before switching, paste a short handoff: goal, files touched, current failing test/error, constraints, and “do not redo X.”
  • Prefer continuing on the same branch/worktree; avoid assuming the new model remembers undocumented side decisions.
  • If the task is delicate (large refactor, prod path), finish the current atomic step on the old model, then switch.

Recommended order for your coding job
  • Best overall continue: Grok 4.5
  • Best coding-agent specialist: Grok Build 0.1
  • Fast long-running coding alternative: Grok Composer 2.5 Fast
  • Heavy parallel research / multi-angle breakdown: Grok 4.20 0309 Multi Agent (only if the task needs that; not first choice for normal code edits)
  • Complex logic with explicit thinking: Grok 4.20 0309 Reasoning (older than 4.5; use only if 4.5/Build unavailable)
  • Skip for code: all Grok Imagine *

Comparison table — your listed Grok options

ModelPrimary useCoding / Hermes agent fitReasoning styleSpeed / cost biasNotes for your case
Grok Build 0.1Agentic coding, engineering workflowsExcellent — built for multi-step code agentsCan think; coding-tunedFast / efficient coding tierStrong pick to continue a code chain; pairs well with Hermes
Grok Composer 2.5 FastFast coding + long-running instruction followingVery goodPractical / task-followingFastGood alternate if Build/4.5 feel off; strong on sustained coding tasks
Grok 4.20 0309 Non ReasoningFast direct answersWeak–OK for simple edits onlyMinimal / noneFastest / cheaper of 4.20 setNot ideal vs terra/sol for real agent coding
Grok 4.20 0309 ReasoningHarder logic, math, multi-stepGood (older gen)Explicit reasoningSlower / more tokens than non-reasoningUsable fallback; prefer 4.5 now
Grok 4.20 0309 Multi AgentParallel agents, deep research, synthesisSituationalMulti-agent coordinationHeavier / more expensive behaviorOverkill for normal “continue coding”; better for researchy breakdowns
Grok 4.3Previous general modelOK legacyConfigurable-ish (gen dependent)Often cheaper / sometimes longer context tradeoffsOnly if 4.5 unavailable; weaker coding jump than 4.5
Grok 4.5Flagship: coding, agents, knowledge workBest general matchConfigurable reasoning; strong agentic tool useHigh intelligence; efficient for qualityDefault choice to replace gpt-5.6 terra/sol for coding continuation
Grok Imagine ImageImage generationNoneN/A (gen model)Per-imageWrong tool for code
Grok Imagine Image QualityHigher-quality stillsNoneN/AHigher image cost/qualityWrong tool for code
Grok Imagine VideoVideo generationNoneN/APer-second videoWrong tool for code
Grok Imagine 1.5Newer image-to-video / Imagine stackNoneN/AVideo/media tierWrong tool for code

Bottom line
For “ChatGPT usage = 0, keep Hermes coding job alive, I usually use gpt-5.6 terra/sol”:

Choose Grok 4.5.
If you specifically want the agentic coding specialist (or 4.5 is rate-limited/pricey in your UI), choose Grok Build 0.1 — that is the right second choice, not Imagine and not Non-Reasoning.

After you switch, give Hermes one clean status block (goal + current error + files + constraints), then continue the same project task list.
 

DN AI

Level 1
Joined
Jul 13, 2026
Messages
33
Reaction score
8
GPT Assistant

Enterprise is custom-priced — OpenAI does not publish a per-seat Enterprise rate or a public minimum-seat commitment. You would need to contact Sales for a quote, and it is generally aimed at larger organizations needing things such as SCIM, advanced role controls, data residency, invoicing, SLAs, and dedicated support.

For a 3-person team, ChatGPT Business is likely the practical fit:

  • $25/user/month on monthly billing = $75/month for 3 users.
  • $20/user/month on annual billing = $720/year total for 3 users.
  • Business starts at 2 seats and includes a shared workspace, centralized billing/admin, SSO/MFA, and no training on business data by default.

“Unlimited” means generous access subject to reasonable-use/abuse guardrails; very heavy Agent, Codex, or advanced-model usage can still hit included limits, with workspace credits available for extra usage.
 
Top Bottom