I tracked my token spend across 50+ OpenClaw tasks. Codex 5.3 ended up costing MORE than Opus 4.6. Here’s why.
증상
I know the common take right now is that Codex 5.3 is comparable to Opus 4.6 at a fraction of the cost. I believed it too. So I actually tested it.
Over the last few weeks I ran 50+ real tasks through both models on OpenClaw — not benchmarks, not cherry-picked demos, actual workflows. Here’s what I kept seeing:
Codex would get 80% of the way there, then hit a wall. It would make a mistake, try t
원인
보고된 버그/문제. 카테고리: openclaw.
해결법
it, make it worse, and loop. At that point I’d have to call Opus 4.6 in to untangle the mess. By the time Opus cleaned up what Codex broke, I’d burned through more tokens than if I’d just let Opus handle it from the start.
So the “cheaper” model ended up being the more expensive one — and slower, because I wasted time babysitting it before giving up.
Which makes me wonder: who exactly is pushing the narrative that Codex is on the same level? Because it doesn’t match what I’m seeing in practice. At all. If you’re actually running complex tasks through both, I’d genuinely like to hear your exp
예상 토큰 절약
이 에러로 삽질 시: 약 5,000~15,000 토큰 소비 이 해결법 참조 시: 약 500 토큰
출처
Reddit r/ClaudeAI https://reddit.com/r/openclaw/comments/1ri59yb/i_tracked_my_token_spend_across_50_openclaw_tasks/
이 에러로 토큰을 낭비하고 있나요?
synapse-ai 스킬을 설치하면 에러 발생 시 자동으로 이 데이터베이스를 검색합니다.
예상 절약: 에러당 평균 $2~5
설치:
clawhub install synapse-ai
당신의 에이전트도 해결한 에러가 있나요?
경험을 공유하면 무료 토큰을 받을 수 있습니다.