You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
The usage-based billing doesn't match the total subscription usage #43416
I subscribed on August 17th.
I’ve probably used around $9 in the past three days.
Why does the amount for my GO subscription only come out to $20? Isn't it supposed to be $60?
If one of those covers your situation, please add a reaction or comment there rather than opening a new report. If your case is genuinely different, feel free to clarify what distinguishes it.
Subscription usage is a key issue for users. There's a $40 difference in the quota here, so I hope the creative team can maintain it carefully. Currently, opencode is the best platform I've used, and I hope you guys keep up the good work.
I’ve currently used up 50% of my total quota. The usage table shows 1.94 5.09 4.07 = $11.1 of usage. My email is [email protected], and I hope the official team can resolve this issue quickly.
The chart is almost all deepseek-v4-flash. At filing the bars were rolling 22% / weekly 98% / monthly 45%; the follow-up is $1.94 + $5.09 + $4.07 = $11.10 visible and monthly ~50%.
bar
shown
window
dollars
weekly
98%
$30
~$29
monthly
45%
$60
~$27
~$11 of Flash is being counted as ~$30 of quota. Flash is Usage $30, so visible × (60 / 30) = 2× and $30 of Flash fills the whole monthly window — not $60.
It seems the new $30 monthly single‑model cap for DeepSeek‑V4‑Flash is incorrectly bound to the global Go subscription total quota. According to documented rules, when DeepSeek‑V4‑Flash hits its $30 single‑model limit, only Flash should be blocked; other models should still be allowed to use the remaining $30 of the $60 global monthly pool.
Activity
github-actions commentedon Aug 19, 2026
This issue might be a duplicate of existing issues. Please check:
If one of those covers your situation, please add a reaction or comment there rather than opening a new report. If your case is genuinely different, feel free to clarify what distinguishes it.
hdd54 commentedon Aug 19, 2026
Subscription usage is a key issue for users. There's a $40 difference in the quota here, so I hope the creative team can maintain it carefully. Currently, opencode is the best platform I've used, and I hope you guys keep up the good work.
hdd54 commentedon Aug 19, 2026
I’ve currently used up 50% of my total quota. The usage table shows 1.94 5.09 4.07 = $11.1 of usage. My email is [email protected], and I hope the official team can resolve this issue quickly.
Zaczero commentedon Aug 19, 2026
The $60 in the docs is not $60 of Flash.
The chart is almost all
deepseek-v4-flash. At filing the bars were rolling 22% / weekly 98% / monthly 45%; the follow-up is $1.94 + $5.09 + $4.07 = $11.10 visible and monthly ~50%.~$11 of Flash is being counted as ~$30 of quota. Flash is Usage $30, so
visible × (60 / 30) = 2×and $30 of Flash fills the whole monthly window — not $60.https://opencode.ai/docs/go/#usage-limits
hdd54 commentedon Aug 20, 2026
It seems the new $30 monthly single‑model cap for DeepSeek‑V4‑Flash is incorrectly bound to the global Go subscription total quota. According to documented rules, when DeepSeek‑V4‑Flash hits its $30 single‑model limit, only Flash should be blocked; other models should still be allowed to use the remaining $30 of the $60 global monthly pool.
hdd54 commentedon Aug 20, 2026
Honestly, the one-month plan I subscribed to on Deepseek before the price hike was just enough for $60 worth of usage.
thdxr commentedon Oct 11, 2026
Thanks for the report! OpenCode 2.0 is now out and development is focused on V2, so we're closing issues filed against OpenCode 1. Please upgrade (
opencode upgrade --major, details: https://anoma.ly/notes/opencode-2-0), and if this is still relevant on 2.0, reopen this issue or open a new one with your 2.0 version.— from 𝕺𝖕𝖊𝖓𝕮𝖔𝖉𝖊