Tabbit
ResourcesBlogModels
Tabbit LogoTabbit

Tabbit — The AI Browser that Works for You

Topics

  • Best Browsers 2026: Rankings and Top Lists
  • AI Browser Guides and Resources
  • Browser Comparisons: Head-to-Head Guides
  • Browser Reviews and Explainers
  • Browser Alternatives
  • Browser Directory: Guides by Browser
  • Agentic Browser Resources
  • Browser Downloads and Install Guides
  • Browser Productivity Resources
  • SillyTavern Model Guides and Presets

Popular Guides

  • Best Browsers 2026: Top 10 Ranked & Compared
  • Best Free AI Browsers 2026: Plans & Prices Compared
  • Rabbit Browser: What It Is & Why Tabbit Is Better
  • Firefox vs Chrome 2026: Privacy, RAM & Speed Compared
  • Best Lightweight Browsers 2026: 7 Tested for RAM & Speed
  • AI Browser List 2026: 10 Browsers Compared
  • Neobrowser: Norton Neo, Download & Alternatives
  • Edge vs Chrome 2026: Speed, RAM & Battery Tested
  • Best Internet Browser for Android 2026
  • Best AI Browser 2026: Top 9 Tested & Ranked

Events

  • Tabbit Skill Competition
  • KPOP SBTI Fandom Personality Test
  • Tabbit Campus Creator Program
  • fifi's Picks: AI Skills for Research Papers
  • User Survey

About

  • Tabbit Blog
  • Press & Media
English
简体中文English
Reviews and evidence

GPT-6 Astra · Official source · Personal experience

GPT-6 Astra: Reproducible Telemetry on Quota Consumption from 30-Second Subagent Polling

A Codex telemetry report links 47 idle 30-second polls with 7.13M parent-agent input tokens; orchestration waits may amplify cost more directly than model quality.

Unverified: the original source could not be rechecked. Historical figures below are not current verified results.

Official sourcePersonal experienceEdited 2026-09-20

Test conditions

Source-specific observation
The September 8, 2026 r/codex report uses a GPT-6 Astra parent, GPT-5.6 Luna XHigh workers, and a Luna Max comparison.
Published conditions
It attributes about 68% of parent input to polling in one account/client/task; cache, server metering, and orchestration bugs remain confounders.

Key data and applicable tasks

One-sentence conclusion

In a single Astra parent-agent orchestration, 47 30-second polls with no state change processed 7.13 million input tokens, accounting for approximately 68% of the parent agent’s input volume and showing that short-interval polling can amplify the context cost of a high-priced parent model.

Applicable scenarios

  • Suitable tasks: Codex multi-agent orchestration, long-running Luna workers, investigating abnormal quota consumption, and designing wait_agent intervals and cache tradeoffs.

  • Unsuitable tasks: Inferring a quota multiplier for all Astra tasks from this result, or directly converting a subscription usage percentage into API dollar costs.

  • Applicable model versions: GPT-6 Astra as the parent agent; GPT-5.6 Luna XHigh as the workers; GPT-5.6 Luna Max as the comparison session.

  • Applicable clients, Agents, or APIs: Codex with rollout telemetry and subagent collaboration tools.

  • Recommended reasoning tier and parameters: The article does not disclose Astra’s effort setting; the author suggests an experimental wait interval of approximately 20–25 minutes, below their assumed cache TTL of approximately 30 minutes. This recommendation was still being tested when the post was published and must not be treated as a validated conclusion.

Test environment, inputs, and configuration

  • An Astra orchestration session and an earlier Luna Max comparison session on the same Plus account.

  • The Astra parent agent waited for Luna workers and observed 47 consecutive 30-second timeout polls; none of the 47 returned a new worker state.

  • Two Luna XHigh workers executed the actual task. The first worker was interrupted twice by the parent agent; after the second interruption, the author found that it had already produced 2 file modifications, 127 lines added, and 6 lines deleted. A replacement worker then continued the work.

  • The comparison group was a real 127-minute work session in which all 12/12 turns used Luna Max context.

  • The article provides a telemetry summary but does not disclose the complete rollout files, original task prompt, parent-agent effort, repository contents, or account-limit algorithm.

Raw data

MetricAstra parent agent: 47 empty pollsAstra parent agent: entire turnTwo Luna XHigh workersLuna Max comparison
Input tokens7,130,18110,463,89719,514,1629,538,330
Cached input tokens7,114,11210,406,01618,811,3928,998,400
Output tokens3,1688,94871,91486,771
Reasoning output tokens1,3313,26624,18255,170
Observation duration47 × 30 seconds = 23 min 30 secApproximately 33 minutesIncluded in the orchestration tree127 minutes
5-hour usage changeNot separately isolated53% → 100% (+47 percentage points)Not separately isolated2% → 10% (+8 percentage points)
Weekly usage changeNot disclosedNot disclosedNot separately isolated89% → 90% (+1 percentage point)
  • Each empty poll processed approximately 151.7K input tokens on average.

  • 7.13M / 10.46M ≈ 68%, meaning that approximately 68% of the parent agent’s raw input volume came from timeout polls with no new state.

  • The two Luna XHigh workers used approximately 2.05 times the input volume of the Luna Max comparison.

  • The author used a linear-scaling upper-bound estimate: 8 × (19.514M / 9.538M) ≈ 16.4 percentage points. Even accepting that simplification, it still cannot explain the observed +47 percentage points; however, because the subscription quota algorithm is undisclosed, this is not a strict cost attribution.

Conclusions and applicable boundaries

The strongest evidence is that the polling count, per-poll context size, and parent-agent token summary cross-check one another; together, they support the claim that “short polling causes substantial repeated context processing.” The extremely high share of cached input indicates that extending the wait interval also requires considering cache-expiration risk. Commenters noted that longer waits could turn the context into uncached input; the author proposed 20–25 minutes only as a tradeoff that still needs validation.

These data cannot prove that the entire +47 percentage-point increase was caused by the Astra parent agent, because the workers, account-limit weighting, Fast/Standard status, and server-side metering formula were not fully disclosed. Nor can the Luna Max per-token quota change be linearly extrapolated to Luna XHigh; the 16.4 figure in the article is only a sensitivity estimate.

Reproduction steps

  1. On the same account and client version, fix the parent/child models, effort, task, repository, context, concurrency, and service mode.

  2. Save complete rollout telemetry and record, for each wait_agent call, its start time, timeout, returned state, input/cached/output/reasoning tokens, and the number of parent-agent re-entries.

  3. Run at least three groups: 30-second polling, 20–25-minute waits, and event-driven wakeups; keep the worker task and runtime consistent.

  4. Report the parent agent and each worker separately, including tokens, usage percentage, wall-clock time, completion level, interruption/replacement count, and cache hits.

  5. Repeat multiple times and record the client version to distinguish model behavior, harness bugs, cache strategy, and temporary server-side metering changes.

What this supports

  • A Codex telemetry report links 47 idle 30-second polls with 7.13M parent-agent input tokens; orchestration waits may amplify cost more directly than model quality.

What this does not support

  • This is one community telemetry trace from a particular Codex orchestration. It omits the full task input, cache hits, subagent concurrency, and a control run, so it cannot attribute 7.13M input tokens to Astra itself or estimate cost in other clients.

Method, limits, and reproduction

The figures, task set, reasoning tier, and client conditions apply only to the listed source and collection snapshot. Different versions, harnesses, or providers must not be compared directly; undisclosed parameters remain unknown.

For a reproduction, fix the model version, provider or client, reasoning tier, tools, task-set version, sample count, and collection date, and record failures, retries, and human corrections. Full steps are in the source notes below.

Original source

Reddit (r/codex) and comments on an OpenAI Codex GitHub issue · tagorrr · Original publication date 2026-09-08 · Site edit date 2026-09-20

Open original source

GPT-6 Astra

Compare GPT-6 Astra in Tabbit

Download the Tabbit client to check model access

Read the full analysis

Overview · English

GPT-6 Astra: What It Is, What Changed, and How to Get Access

A sourced GPT-6 Astra overview covering the model ID, access routes, GPT-5.6 Sol changes, benchmark caveats, and practical fit.

Full review · English

GPT-6 Astra Review: The 2.5x Price Premium and the Stubbornness Tax

An evidence-led GPT-6 Astra review analyzing the 47% OSWorld latency cut, benchmark adapter gaps, the 2.5x price premium, community feedback, and workload fit.

Pricing · English

GPT-6 Astra Pricing: API Rates, Tiers, and Real Task Costs

GPT-6 Astra pricing explained: the full API rate card, Batch/Flex/Fast tiers, the 272K cliff, ChatGPT plans, worked budgets, and a local cost calculator.

Alternatives · English

GPT-6 Astra Alternatives: 5 Models to Beat the 2.5x Tax

Compare five alternatives to GPT-6 Astra by completed-task cost, latency, context window, coding precision, deployment fit, and verified community evidence.

Related reviews

GPT-6 Astra: OpenAI's Official Five-Benchmark Comparison with GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI’s tables show GPT-6 Astra ahead of GPT-5.6 Sol on several computer-use, professional, coding, and science tasks, but the tool, latency, and cost footnotes are part of the evidence.GPT-6 Astra: CodeRabbit's Cross-File Code Review and Cost EvaluationCodeRabbit reports GPT-6 Astra on actionable bug coverage for overall and cross-file review samples, plus cost assumptions and a Godot project iteration; the full PR harness is unpublished.GPT-6 Astra: Field Report on 100K+ LOC Long-Horizon Tasks, Reasoning Tiers, and Fast ModeA Codex user reports GPT-6 Astra running about 70 hours on a 100K+ LOC geometry-engine task without finishing and records High effort and quota use; it is personal field evidence.GPT-6 Astra: Artificial Analysis Comparison of Intelligence, Speed, and Cost Across Six Reasoning TiersArtificial Analysis shows six GPT-6 Astra reasoning configurations with intelligence, time to first token, speed, and cost per task; the High/Max cost gap argues for task-based routing.OpenAI GPT-6 Astra Prompting and Configuration GuideOpenAI’s GPT-6 Astra guide frames hard end-to-end work with a goal, tool boundaries, deliverables, targeted verification, and an explicit authorization scope.OpenAI GPT-6 Astra API Model Configuration and Cost BoundariesThe GPT-6 Astra model page defines reasoning effort, context, cache pricing, tools, and endpoint boundaries for a reproducible API configuration sheet.GPT-6 Astra: Guide to Cleaning Up Skills and AGENTS.md InstructionsEric Provencher’s public case turns Skills and AGENTS cleanup into a workflow of scope, completion criteria, and verification commands for Astra repository governance.GPT-6 Astra: Complete Codex Repository Instruction Audit PromptA public Codex prompt asks Astra to audit repository instructions, keep the change scope narrow, and distinguish executed commands from inspected ones; the post does not publish the final result.