All GitHub Copilot plans are now on usage-based billing [FAQ]

Hello GitHub Community,

Important

Effective June 16, 2026: We're reopening sign-ups for GitHub Copilot Student, Pro, Pro+, and Max plans gradually over the next couple of weeks for new subscribers. If you've been waiting to get started with Copilot, select the plan that fits your needs.

If you find that you're using more than what's included in your current plan, we've made some updates to help you get the best experience:

• Upgrade to unlock more included usage: When approaching your included and additional usage limits, you'll see prompts to upgrade to the next tier. You only pay the price difference between plans. Upon upgrading, you immediately get access to the new plan's total included usage, minus what you've already used this month.

• Pay as you go and stay on your current plan: You don't need to switch plans to keep going. If you've exhausted your included credits and hit your additional spending limit, you can pay for the additional usage you've already consumed, giving you continued access without switching plans.

If your preferred option isn't available yet, check back soon & review the FAQ below for additional answers.

📍 Frequently Asked Questions

Why can’t I sign up right now?

New sign-ups are opening gradually as we put safeguards in place to address abuse patterns we saw under the previous billing model. This allows us to ensure Copilot remains a reliable, high-quality experience for all users.

What options do I have to continue using Copilot once I've hit my additional usage spending limit?

You have two options:

• Upgrade to the next plan – Pay a flat upgrade fee and receive the higher plan's included AI Credits (minus what you've already consumed). For example, upgrading from Pro to Pro+ costs $29 and gives you access to the Pro+ tier's $70 in included AI credits, minus your prior consumption.
• Pay as you go – Pay for your accrued additional usage immediately to unlock continued usage on your current plan without upgrading. This gives you the flexibility to remain on your current plan while continuing to use Copilot.

What does it look like in practice to upgrade? Can you give an example of what the flow looks like?

When you hit your additional usage spending limit on Copilot Pro, you'll see options to either pay as you go (settle your $29 in accrued additional usage to continue on Pro) or upgrade to Pro+ (pay a $29 upgrade fee, and receive the $70 Pro+ credits minus your total current usage). The upgrade fee is designed so your total spend matches what a new Pro+ signup would pay.

For example: Mona has a Copilot Pro subscription and has hit their spending limit after $5.00 USD in additional usage. Mona can either choose to pay down the $5 in additional usage or can upgrade to Pro+. If Mona upgrades to Pro+, Mona will be charged $29.00 USD to upgrade and receive $50 (70 AI Credits from Pro+ - ($15 AI Credits from Pro + $5 of additional usage) in AI Credits to use for the remaining month.

Will we always have to upgrade to a more expensive plan?

No. We are rolling out a Pay as you Go option that allows you to pay for additional usage on your current plan without upgrading. When you hit your additional usage spending limit, you'll be presented with both options: upgrade to the next plan for more included usage, or pay as you go to continue on your current plan. The upgrade path offers better per-dollar value through included credits, while pay as you go gives you flexibility to stay on your current plan.

Why do I have to pay first? Why can’t I just continue to use Copilot and pay when the month is over?

Pay as you Go helps protect against unpredictable costs. Postpaid billing can lead to unexpectedly large bills at the end of the month, and requiring payment upfront—combined with spending limits and the usage dashboard—helps avoid that. You can also upgrade to the next plan tier for higher included usage and spending limits.

📍Usage-based billing

Effective June 1, 2026: Usage-based billing is now in effect for all GitHub Copilot plans. Please refer to our initial announcement and today’s changelog for more details.

What are the additional usage limits? How much additional usage can users purchase?

The limits increase by plan, so the limits for users on a Pro+ plan will generally be higher than those for users on a Pro plan. They also vary depending on a user’s usage patterns, billing history, and verification states for their GitHub account. These limits are subject to change, and you’ll see an in-product notification when you hit a limit.

How will we know when we hit an additional usage spending limit?

You will get an in-product notification when you hit the additional usage spending limit.

Why do the spending limits vary? Why are some users treated differently?

Limits vary by plan tier and account signals, including usage patterns, billing history, and verification state, to protect service reliability and prevent abuse.

How exactly are you determining the amount of a user’s additional usage spending limit? What's the specific criteria?

We look at a variety of factors, including usage and payment history with GitHub. We can’t disclose specifics, as it would give bad actors more details to work with to circumvent our safeguards.

If I upgrade to a more expensive plan but then decide to downgrade, what does that look like? Are there any restrictions on when I can downgrade?

You can downgrade at any point. The downgrade will be a “delayed downgrade” where you will stay in the current, more expensive plan until your next billing cycle. Then you will be charged for the downgraded plan and the lower included usage will take effect the next calendar month.

Please note that if you upgrade from a Student plan to a paid plan, downgrading will take you to a Free plan and you will need to reapply for Student plan.

You said you’d loosen restrictions once usage-based billing is in effect, but sign-ups for new users are still paused. What’s going on?

We understand the frustration. Usage-based billing is now in effect, but we’ve needed additional time to put safeguards in place to ensure a reliable experience for all users. We plan to re-enable new sign-ups for all Copilot plans in the coming weeks.

Will you continue to offer flex AI Credits after the current promotion ends?

Flex allotments may vary from month to month. They’re designed to adapt as the economics of AI evolve, including model pricing, new models, and improvements in efficiency.

How can I use the enhanced model capabilities like the 1M context window?

These will be available in Copilot CLI and VS Code. In Copilot CLI, once you select a model you’ll be asked if you want default or long context. Select long context for the 1M context window. In VS Code, you can configure this through a separate context size dropdown menu.

Why should I pay GitHub API prices when I can just go pay the model provider directly?

Copilot gives you a single subscription across every model family we support, including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI , with model availability varying by plan— without managing separate API keys, billing relationships, or rate limits with each provider. You get one bill, one set of usage controls, and access to all of it across VS Code, the Copilot CLI, the Copilot SDK, Copilot Code Review, and tools like OpenCode — without configuring each one separately.

For a lot of developers, the value isn't just "access to a model." It's that Copilot is deeply integrated into the tools they already use: pull requests, code review, the editor, the terminal. That integration work, including the context from your repo, your PR diff, your open files, and more, is what turns a model call into something more useful.

Will users continue to see the same level of restrictive rate limiting we’ve seen over the past few months?

We’ve loosened rate limits considerably, and users should not experience them with normal use.

Can I set up budgets at the user-level for my organization?

Yes, admins can now set a universal budget for users or override for specific sets of users. As users approach their budgets, admins will receive email notifications and can adjust budgets anytime from their billing settings. See our budget management documentation for details.

[EuSouVoce]

So the answer is basically: if you hit your limit too quickly, you should upgrade and pay more?

I get why GitHub moved to usage-based billing, but the numbers feel way off compared to the previous system.

I had only two short sessions in the VS Code extension, with maybe 2–4 prompts total, and somehow that already consumed 210.5 AI Credits/Tokens/Whatever.

Under the old model, that kind of usage would barely make a dent in my monthly quota. Now it feels like a handful of normal interactions can burn through a noticeable percentage of the month's allowance.

What worries me, and most of the users, isn't paying for usage. It's not knowing what a few everyday prompts are going to cost. If developers can't reasonably predict their consumption, it's hard to trust Copilot as a tool they'll use throughout the month.

Honestly, this feels like the kind of change that pushes people to look at other providers or even go directly to the model vendors instead of using Copilot as their main AI tool.

More transparency around how credits are consumed in real-world VS Code workflows would go a long way.
And remember... money doesn't grow on trees nor is it charcoal to be burned!

[h-archer]

@UwUPrincess even 160k isnt enough. They increased costs by a factor of at least 50x so for max plan we should be getting somewhere like 600k to be workable.

[UwUPrincess]

@h-archer I agree completely, but I was merely making a suggestion that we're not even at a reasonable amount. I mean either way you need to increase the amount a lot in order for us to be able to use it efficiently. Otherwise, we're going to be paying $2000 a month for barely enough credit to work full-time.

[putitdigital]

our agreement was $10 per month why now it is telling me about $29, can we have an option for it to stop if $10 is finished.

[NovaRouteAI]

One thing that helped our team adjust to usage-based billing: stop trusting the monthly number and start auditing per-request.

For every call we log input, cached, and output tokens and recompute cost against the price card locally. When our recomputed number diverges from the invoice, we know exactly which requests to point at. It also makes cache behavior visible — cached-input pricing changes real spend a lot more than headline rates do.

The schema and a stdlib-only validator are public if useful: https://github.com/NovaRouteAI/per-request-cost-telemetry

[marc288888]

I've just cancelled mine, i started to use https://claude.ai/ for over a month now and its perfect for what i need and no hidden charges !!!

[Fu-Jie]

My GitHub account is associated with Fu-Jie, and I have been a long-time annual subscriber.

My annual membership was originally set to expire in approximately two months. Earlier today (June 1, 2026), I clicked the "Refund" button in my account settings out of curiosity—not with the intention of immediately cancelling. I expected this action would lead to a confirmation page, not process the refund directly. However, the refund was executed immediately without any secondary confirmation prompt.

I believe this is a design flaw in the refund workflow. Any action affecting payment and subscription status should include an explicit confirmation step to prevent unintended consequences from accidental clicks or exploratory actions. The absence of this basic safeguard led to the unexpected cancellation of my membership.

To clarify: My request is not about renewal, but about the value of my current active contract. My existing membership had not yet expired and still had nearly two months of service remaining. Given recent changes to GitHub's billing policies, the terms and benefits under my current contract hold unique value during this remaining period. Once refunded and cancelled, renewing would not provide the same conditions.

Given the above, I request that my original membership status and expiration date be restored, and I strongly recommend that your team improve the refund process by adding a necessary confirmation step.

I look forward to your reply.

[prcris]

Eu também fiz isso no passado e ocorreu o mesmo, eles nem perguntam, te cancelam na hora. Muito louco isso.

Hi @Fu-Jie,

Thank you for writing in and explaining the situation.

We understand from what you shared that clicking the refund button processed immediately without a confirmation step, and that this was not your intent. We appreciate you flagging this as a UX concern. I've noted this feedback and shared with internal teams for investigation.

Regarding restoring your previous subscription: this falls outside what I'm able to action directly. We cannot resolve account related issues in this public forum, and I'm sharing this information with the appropriate team to review whether your original subscription and expiration date can be reinstated.

I'll follow up once I have more information. Thank you for your patience.

[chalkplum]

one afternoon pro+ limit 85%

[JacquesUwonda]

I also got the same situation

That credit-based usage value is not transparent😒

[ghost]

The new pricing model is outright robbery!!! I've already canceled my GitHub Copilot plan subscription!!

did the same

Me too

[andreazaffanella]

I dont understand why people are still complaining.. switch to Open AI Codex plan... 20 a month per seat, and a very generous unlimited plans... plus BETTER models than the ones available in gh copilot... words do not mean anything if you dont put your money where your mouth is.

[Sajjadarasham]

and i also got that problem just like you :(

[putitdigital]

our agreement was $10 per month why now it is telling me about $29, can we have an option for it to stop if $10 is finished.

[dobrowolskijaroslaw1-sys]

Subject: Large day-to-day difference in Copilot usage for similar work

Hello,

I am reporting a large difference in Copilot usage between two recent sessions on the same repository. On 2026-05-31, I was able to work through a long session and the usage remained within a range that felt predictable. On 2026-06-01, a session that felt comparable or smaller in visible scope consumed much more of my quota. From my point of view the difference is easy to verify and does not match the apparent amount or difficulty of the work performed. I understand that internal context, tool payload, or other service-side factors may exist, but the current accounting behavior is not transparent enough for planning real project work. Please clarify whether the accounting model changed or whether hidden context growth is being billed in a way that users cannot see. I can provide screenshots, approximate session times, and a short written comparison of the two sessions. 8 hours not heavy work...

Regards,
Very disapointed...

[LTSarc]

It is disappointing to see the response to these concerns shift into a 'blame game' where users are essentially told they have a 'skill issue' for not optimizing tokens, rather than GitHub providing a transparent, predictable estimation model before requests are run.As it stands, the 'integration' advantage doesn't justify the cost or the lack of predictability.
For my personal work, I’m moving to Codex and exploring other providers immediately. For my team, the economics of a $0.5M internal deployment for 100 seats now far outweigh the headache of usage-based billing, privacy concerns, and the nightmare of renegotiating third-party NDAs.

I hope you realize that Codex will do the same as well if they get the huge amount of transferred users. The old rates were simply massively underwater financially and MS has drawn a line.

That is a "them" issue. They should not have made a product with high value, low cost, tie it into systems that a majority of developers use, push it at every turn, then yank the proverbial rug out saying "Oops! Too expensive."

I mean, it's immoral but also entirely predictable and a classic business strategy. You were effectively all on a discounted preview. If you look at API costs on any frontier model, it is obvious MS was eating over 90% subsidy here. MS may live on a mountain of money but the board would never approve of this forever.

[AAltemus]

It's the strategy, right? 2/3 of the people move on, 1/3 of them pay more so it's enough to cover everyone who left as far as money coming in and they have 1/3 of the usage.

[neohemp]

It's the strategy, right? 2/3 of the people move on, 1/3 of them pay more so it's enough to cover everyone who left as far as money coming in and they have 1/3 of the usage.

My brother's company uses them and are staying with them because of their increased security so I think it's just a way to free up access for them while charging them more than just simply using the API

[pradeepramesh123]

@dobrowolskijaroslaw1-sys
Hi
I would like to upgrade to copilot pro+ on vscode i got an option to upgrade but when i click on it , the page has been redirected to limits but there i dont see an option to upgrade,
could you please how can i upgrade, i adjusted the budgets as well.

[roy-tong]

Large day-to-day variance on identical work usually means the meter is counting attempts, not outcomes: a session that retries more (or triggers more background completions) burns quota without producing more work. A recount that separates attempts from delivered results per day makes the variance explainable instead of mysterious. Our conformance pack does that recount from your own logs (local, free; 110+ tools audited, 23 fixes merged upstream): github.com/roy-tong/AgentMeasure

[ThePlenkov]

Dumbest decision ever....

[YuriySamorodov]

Guess what? It's called effective management, hah

[chenlinzhe]

I upgraded to GitHub Pro ($48/year) but downgraded it back to Free because I cannot subscribe to Copilot at this time.
I am requesting a prorated refund for the unused portion of the GitHub Pro subscription.
I would like to subscribe to Copilot Pro+ at $39 per month.
What should I do?

[ElettroAle]

I upgraded to GitHub Pro ($48/year) but downgraded it back to Free because I cannot subscribe to Copilot at this time. I am requesting a prorated refund for the unused portion of the GitHub Pro subscription. I would like to subscribe to Copilot Pro+ at $39 per month. What should I do?

Switch to claude code

[mikegeering]

but at the new consumption rate, that should give you about two days worth !!!

[DanielRuf]

Hm, wondering if there will be similar changes for the many Copilot variants in M365 and general Microsoft products in the future.

@DanielRuf 👋🏻 Thanks for the question. Our team here supports GitHub Copilot specifically, and we don't have visibility into billing plans for Microsoft 365 Copilot or other Microsoft products.

For questions about M365 Copilot, Microsoft's product and support channels would be the best resource.

I am assuming this was posted in jest, but answering with added context for you or any other users where the info may be helpful.

[LESdylan]

I had faith in you.. Honestly, I regret not taking the refund offer you made. I genuinely think you're going to lose at least 80% of your client base. This is so ridiculous. It's far better to pay in real money and not by token. The base usage is ridiculously low.

[YuriySamorodov]

I regret not taking the refund offer you made

I hear you.. Sound like a trap indeed. So sad and uneven

[gyzrich]

The new pricing model is outright robbery!!! I've already canceled my GitHub Copilot plan subscription!!

[VoxSecuritatis]

I think it is more of a pendulum; yes, intially a lot of people will leave, but I have a feeling they will come back... eventually.

[tofanelli]

I think it is more of a pendulum; yes, intially a lot of people will leave, but I have a feeling they will come back... eventually.

most likely they won't for a fairly simple reason... you have set your whole workflow on copilot, adjusted every single part to your needs and you had to, forcefully, to change to another app, another workflow, another settings and so on.... once you got used to that new one, you won't be coming back even if the older one is better just because you are tired to going back and forth... you most likely won't be doing any of this. you will stick to the new one and start adjusting yourself

[jakteixeiraf]

I'm using VS Code with GitHub Copilot and I chose LLM GPT 5.4 Mini, but the platform is deducting the cost of Gemini 3.5 Flash, and because of that, my credits are disappearing without me using them.

[jakteixeiraf]

I'm currently using SONET 4.6 and it's charging me for GPT 5.4 mini, are you kidding me?

@jakteixeiraf 👋🏻 Hi there,

Thank you for reporting this — I want to make sure we understand what's happening.

To clarify: you selected GPT 5.4 Mini in VS Code Chat, but your usage report shows charges attributed to Gemini 3.5 Flash. Is that correct?

A couple of things to be aware of:

• Some Copilot features (e.g., code completions, agent sub-tasks, or background operations) may use different models than the one selected in your Chat panel. These are separate from your explicit Chat model choice.
• Your detailed usage CSV will show exactly which model was used for each request.

Could you please:

1. Download your usage CSV from Settings → Billing and licensing → Metered usage → Copilot
2. Confirm whether the Gemini 3.5 Flash charges correspond to Chat requests (where you selected GPT 5.4 Mini) or to other features like completions or background operations

If the CSV confirms you're being charged for a model you didn't select for those specific interactions, please share that detail and we'll investigate further.

[ronan-fesselier]

the admin itself is a f*****g bot :)

[Mieekaserra]

How in the hell can 1 prompt which last month would barly cost a cent, now take up $4.51.

this is ununsable and needs rolling back.

[suspex0]

Yes one small UI bug fix 1,50$ lmao

[Plushie905]

Imagine , 2 calls , 550 credits so if i'm in Pro plan = 3 commands -_-

[gyzrich]

The new pricing model is outright robbery!!! I've already canceled my GitHub Copilot plan subscription!!

[hikerID]

Check out the input/output costs for some of the agents, it's insane. Claude Sonnet is 300 input, 1500 output, 30 for cache.

[SuperManito]

So why has the Pro plan reduced its usage limit by almost 100 times compared to before? I also discovered that the GPT-5 mini model has become less intelligent.

[LTSarc]

You should have tested this on people instead of using AI. Most of us are willing to pay $10/month but not $100 or more per month. The mystery billing is problematic because we can use up a quarter of our budget on the 3rd and end up with nothing left by the 10th. Then we are stuck trying to decipher the zillion lines of AI generated code in order to debug problems created with the assistance of AI.

I hope you will consider how this impacts your customers.

Brother you can't even run hundreds of thousands of tokens on a middling, non-Agentic model for $10/month.

As someone who has used independent providers and hosted my own locally, frontier models are staggeringly expensive. Power users were eating up thousands and thousands of dollars in model use.

[neohemp]

You should have tested this on people instead of using AI. Most of us are willing to pay $10/month but not $100 or more per month. The mystery billing is problematic because we can use up a quarter of our budget on the 3rd and end up with nothing left by the 10th. Then we are stuck trying to decipher the zillion lines of AI generated code in order to debug problems created with the assistance of AI.

I hope you will consider how this impacts your customers.

Brother you can't even run hundreds of thousands of tokens on a middling, non-Agentic model for $10/month.

As someone who has used independent providers and hosted my own locally, frontier models are staggeringly expensive. Power users were eating up thousands and thousands of dollars in model use.

Except they did do that
And they took people's money up front for a year and then backed out on it

[LTSarc]

You should have tested this on people instead of using AI. Most of us are willing to pay $10/month but not $100 or more per month. The mystery billing is problematic because we can use up a quarter of our budget on the 3rd and end up with nothing left by the 10th. Then we are stuck trying to decipher the zillion lines of AI generated code in order to debug problems created with the assistance of AI.
I hope you will consider how this impacts your customers.

Brother you can't even run hundreds of thousands of tokens on a middling, non-Agentic model for $10/month.
As someone who has used independent providers and hosted my own locally, frontier models are staggeringly expensive. Power users were eating up thousands and thousands of dollars in model use.

Except they did do that And they took people's money up front for a year and then backed out on it

You still got the year you paid for, they're just opting out of offering it going forward. I'm not trying to defend MS' actions here, just the logic behind them and how predictable it was. Have you seen what OAI or Anthropic API key rates are?

[AAltemus]

You should have tested this on people instead of using AI. Most of us are willing to pay $10/month but not $100 or more per month. The mystery billing is problematic because we can use up a quarter of our budget on the 3rd and end up with nothing left by the 10th. Then we are stuck trying to decipher the zillion lines of AI generated code in order to debug problems created with the assistance of AI.
I hope you will consider how this impacts your customers.

Brother you can't even run hundreds of thousands of tokens on a middling, non-Agentic model for $10/month.
As someone who has used independent providers and hosted my own locally, frontier models are staggeringly expensive. Power users were eating up thousands and thousands of dollars in model use.

Except they did do that And they took people's money up front for a year and then backed out on it

You still got the year you paid for, they're just opting out of offering it going forward. I'm not trying to defend MS' actions here, just the logic behind them and how predictable it was. Have you seen what OAI or Anthropic API key rates are?

The logic/strategy was more or less a bait and switch. No one would pay the rates they wanted so they got everyone in on the cheap, then raised the prices. With entire companies burning their full year's budget on tokens in 3 months and then moving on from AI, they'll have to figure out a way to make this cheaper. I am fully aware of what it costs and all, but that's not my problem to solve.

[neohemp]

You should have tested this on people instead of using AI. Most of us are willing to pay $10/month but not $100 or more per month. The mystery billing is problematic because we can use up a quarter of our budget on the 3rd and end up with nothing left by the 10th. Then we are stuck trying to decipher the zillion lines of AI generated code in order to debug problems created with the assistance of AI.
I hope you will consider how this impacts your customers.

Brother you can't even run hundreds of thousands of tokens on a middling, non-Agentic model for $10/month.
As someone who has used independent providers and hosted my own locally, frontier models are staggeringly expensive. Power users were eating up thousands and thousands of dollars in model use.

Except they did do that And they took people's money up front for a year and then backed out on it

You still got the year you paid for, they're just opting out of offering it going forward. I'm not trying to defend MS' actions here, just the logic behind them and how predictable it was. Have you seen what OAI or Anthropic API key rates are?

That's just it they didn't get the year they paid for, they changed the terms in the middle of the contract. So youre running your mouth and don't even know what they did.

[CCarrMcMahon]

In case anyone is curious on the value comparison, this is what I am seeing on the $10 plan using GPT-5.4:

• Old Version:
  • 300 premium requests (3 messages = 1% usage)
• New Version:
  • 50 premium requests (3 messages = 6% usage)
  • 1000 credits (3 messages ~= 100 credits = 10% usage)

The 100 credits is an upper estimate of what I have been seeing if you assume larger prompts. I have seen as low as 10 credits and as high as 60 so far today. On average I seem to hover around 33 credits per prompt.

[TMattes]

@CCarrMcMahon 👋🏻

You're right that the units have changed: the old model counted "requests" regardless of complexity, while usage-based billing measures actual token consumption. For users who frequently use higher-cost models like GPT-5.4 with larger context, the per-interaction cost is higher than a flat request count implied.

A few things that may help manage your credits:

• Model choice matters significantly. GPT-5 mini ($0.25/1M input, $2.00/1M output) is substantially cheaper than higher-tier models. Choosing a model appropriate to the task complexity can stretch your credits considerably.
• Code completions remain unlimited and are not charged per token on all paid plans.
• Caching helps over time. Repeated context (e.g., the same files across a session) gets cached automatically at up to 90% lower cost.
• Shorter, focused prompts with only necessary context reduce input tokens.

You can see exactly what each request costs in your usage CSV: Settings → Billing and licensing → Metered usage → Copilot.

For budget controls and notifications: https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/tutorials/budgets/getting-started-with-budget-controls

@github Community Admin
I also see a major issue with the output cost, which is significantly higher than the input cost: users have no control over the number of tokens the model generates. While users can keep their input short and focused, every LLM I’ve seen so far tends to be far too verbose, which consumes a large number of tokens.

And what if the output is completely useless? Users still have to pay for it—and on top of that, they then have to spend additional time fixing the mistakes in an often lengthy and expensive response.

Furthermore, the creativity is completely lost, if you constantly have to monitor your token consumption and then realize, that your tokens are gone, before you even reach a viable result.

You really should overthink that, otherwise you will loose a lot of customers...

[lelacag]

Join the $10Club :) I am not going to change it at all. I just want to see where it goes. I hope they change their way of billing and continue to support the developers.

[chalkplum]

GPT-5 mini lol

[aidannairn]

In the previous thread about Usage-based Billing it seemed that a common gripe people had was that unused tokens do not roll-over into the next month. To my knowledge, the topic was never addressed by GitHub. Are GitHub able to disclose the factors contributing to this decision?

While GitHub make a valid point regarding the convenience of having one bill and one set of usage controls—I’ve opted to stick to Pro+, burn through my allocated credit in a week, and then pivot to using OpenRouter for the remainder of the month. OpenRouter offers a similar set of advantages that Copilot has over other providers. It can be used within the same VS Code interface. Plus it has more models and credit rolls-over for up to a year.

[aidannairn]

Open Router can't change and edit files, it is useless for me, as I am not a programmer, I am a systems admin.

That may have been true some time ago. I can say with absolute certainty that using OpenRouter within VS Code is as seamless as using Copilot’s own models.

If you ask Google today, the AI response will likely give you some outdated info about requiring an extension for it to work. So I understand the skepticism.

Creating an account is free. Why not give it a try using one of their free models? That’s what I did last month when I was weighing out my options.

[nikolaydubina]

Open Router can't change and edit files

what do you mean? get token. connect in VSCode. all AIs that support tools connected throuhg standard VSCode can use 100% of tools there. vision, files, everything. from gemini class models to deepseek or anything, local or cloud, does not matter. as long as they speak OpenAI API.

[pradeepramesh123]

@aidannairn may i know how did you get the option to opt pro+ , i set the budgets but iam strugling to upgrade to pro_, could you please help me on to get pro+

[neohemp]

Posting here so I can still subscribe to the chaos

[ZHUYUEHAN1]

is that you?

[alesanGreat]

I've been a paying Copilot user and this new credits system is simply unacceptable. In less than 5 hours of normal work today — the very first day of the new billing — I've already burned through 50% of my monthly plan. This is not a pricing change, this is a bait and switch. We paid for a tool, and overnight it became something we can't afford to use the way we always have. I'm canceling my subscription unless this is reverted or seriously reconsidered.

[pradeepramesh123]

@alesanGreat @esp-dev may i know how did you get the option to opt pro+ , i set the budgets but iam strugling to upgrade to pro_, could you please help me on to get pro+

[esp-dev]

@pradeepramesh123 about 2 months ago I upgraded to pro+, there was simply an option to upgrade, settings > billing and licensing > licensing, but now iam free :)

[esp-dev]

@pradeepramesh123 the max plan makes no sense, for this money codex is cheaper and practically unlimited, the max plan would be enough for me for a week

[pradeepramesh123]

@esp-dev @alesanGreat
Earlier i used to upgrade same as you mentioned under licensing but i cant find that option.

I would like to upgrade to copilot pro+ on vscode i got an option to upgrade but when i click on it , the page has been redirected to limits but there i dont see an option to upgrade,
could you please how can i upgrade, i adjusted the budgets as well.

[chalkplum]

dont upgrade it will just last a day longer. look elsewhere copilot is the worst offering on the market by a very long margin

[jarrocha]

We are not the main target customer anymore. If you read the news, you can see that large companies are paying millions for this type of service, they don't need users like us.

[HendrikMarxen]

Well, my IT lead already looks where to limit Github Usage and try to figure out if it was a necessary usage. Actually you need good models like Opus in Enterprise context, but if time isnt crucial or you havent a customer who spends tons of money for development, I see no reason to use GitHub Copilot anymore. Its too expensive now

[meganurmolla10-droid]

---

[hplaatjies]

i have upgraded from pro to pro+ a week ago, and is still waiting for the ticket (#4548030 ) to be attended too. What seem to be the issue with attending to tickets.

[astrochion159]

[Unfxcoin]

Privacy-related requests: +1 877 448 4820 (also reachable at privacy@github.com) 6
Enterprise sales inquiries: available through GitHub's "Contact Sales" page 3
For regular support (account issues, billing, technical problems), the recommended and fastest route is the online support portal at support.github.com, where you can sign in and submit a ticket

[AlBraj]

Unfortunately, Unfxcoin, you're right. You're going to have to sue. As a business, you may have the legal resources to finance such a suit. There are 1000s of singles out there getting the same treatment but who don't have the resources to sue these guys themselves. Given your losses (both direct with subscription fees and indirect with idle staff and broken contracts) you could well have a significant legal complaint. From the reception to your complaints so far, I suggest you include a "mad dog-type" litigator rather than only standard, corporate legal types. Hopefully this would get their attention, get your money back without even going to court, and open their eyes as to what is going on. They seem blissfully unaware. Ugh.

…

On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 9:31 AM Unfxcoin ***@***.***> wrote: Privacy-related requests: +1 877 448 4820 <(877)%20448-4820> (also reachable at ***@***.***) 6 <https://www.datarequests.org/company/github/> Enterprise sales inquiries: available through GitHub's "Contact Sales" page 3 <https://github.com/security/contact-sales> For regular support (account issues, billing, technical problems), the recommended and fastest route is the online support portal at support.github.com, where you can sign in and submit a ticket — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#197089?email_source=notifications&email_token=AK62UWS6JWCH2TINDTSB4VD5MLSLVA5CNFSNUABIM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2ENFZWG5LTONUW63SDN5WW2ZLOOQXTCOBRHE4TGNJVUZZGKYLTN5XKOY3PNVWWK3TUUVSXMZLOOSWGM33PORSXEX3DNRUWG2Y#discussioncomment-18199355>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AK62UWQXGOZGSDB3U4MCT6L5MLSLVAVCNFSNUABIKJSXA33TNF2G64TZHMZTAMJVG4ZTGNBUHNCGS43DOVZXG2LPNY5TCMBRGQZTMMBVUF3AE> . Triage notifications, keep track of coding agent tasks and review pull requests on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://github.com/notifications/mobile/ios/AK62UWQUVI7DP6OGOYP3BST5MLSLVA5CNFSNUABIM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2ENFZWG5LTONUW63SDN5WW2ZLOOQXTCOBRHE4TGNJVUZZGKYLTN5XKOY3PNVWWK3TUUVSXMZLOOSVGM33PORSXEX3JN5ZQ> and Android <https://github.com/notifications/mobile/android/AK62UWSSG6MG26C73IYFCXD5MLSLVA5CNFSNUABIM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2ENFZWG5LTONUW63SDN5WW2ZLOOQXTCOBRHE4TGNJVUZZGKYLTN5XKOY3PNVWWK3TUUVSXMZLOOSXGM33PORSXEX3BNZSHE33JMQ>. Download it today! You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[DerekFoulk]

I avoided rage posting about how I use all of my GH Copilot Pro+ subscription's AI credit allotment in less than 2 days after the pricing model was changed... This is likely due to the fact that I have taken the time to create large instruction files (community instructions plus my personal preferences and an experimental set of instructions for workflow, branching, work item management, etc.) and typically use the same thread throughout a work item. Nevertheless, I just wanted to echo what many are saying here: this is no longer an affordable product for me to use.

I work for a very large company that announced a big AI initiative about a month before the pricing changes. They left our allotment of GH copilot credits unlimited for just over a month before announcing that they would be setting limits now (no doubt because their bill was astronomical). I guess we'll just have to wait for GH/MS to figure out how to make this affordable for us again. I appreciate the Visual Studio integration- that's why I used this in the first place. Yet today, it's just too damn expensive to use in complex workflows.

[karvizyonmedya]

bence o kadar saçmaladı ki resmen para tutazağı oldu amacı dışında hareket ediyor.artık buna bir çözüm bülün habire ödeme yap ödeme yap şeklinde bıktım artık bir projeyi sonlandıramadan kaç kez ödeme yaptığımı unuttum.buna bir çözüm bulun artık yeter.

[karvizyonmedya]

onca çabanın karşılığı bu olmamalı berbat bir hizmet bence para tuzağı verdiğimiz paraya karşı hak etmediğiniz bir ücret alıyorsunuz.bence gereksiz bunaldım artık öde öde öde yeter

[karvizyonmedya]

yazık gerçekten haksız kazanç elde ediyorsunuz .

[OlivierVerhaegen]

This price model is so bad, I just switched my annual subscription to get access to Sonnet 5 as 4.5 and 4.6 are also retired giving me no choise considering I like the Claude models more than GPT. Now just in one day I've gone through all my available usage. And also maxed out paying for extra usage... This is really not a tool you can rely on. Now I have to pay to continue, I just really don't get this billing system with what feels like a billion parameters just to use AI...

[OlivierVerhaegen]

Will be looking into using other providers for sure. Github Copilot was my go to for a year and I still really like the UX of it but the billing and pricing make it unusable.

[Donny1717]

That true sir

I burned through 1,500 credits in just six hours after the 5.6 update, even though before this I barely used 200 credits per month.

That’s why I keep saying — don’t trust any of these systems until you’re running everything inside your own environment.

Once they change the model, the token counter, or enable extra thinking modes without telling you, your usage and costs can spike out of nowhere.

[AlBraj]

I happily used CoPilot for months until the billing change booted me out (like some of you). Using Claude (cline) now. This is not a "bargain" but costs can be somewhat controlled by tying down what is used by the LLM in cline's rules. Left on its own, cline will happily send a ton of irrelevant "stuff" to the LLM and this increases the costs (number of tokens) for a transaction. To keep costs down you have to specify cline rules to tell it to eliminate it. For example, don't send duplicate files, don't send massive files with useless junk when only a very small part is needed, etc. In addition to the cline rules, you can tell it to ignore (cline ignore) categories of things, like extra directories/folders with old, irrelevant material; using files "above" the current folder, etc. Getting a handle on this and using selected/cheaper models for easier things helped cut down my costs to a more "reasonable" level. When in doubt, I also tell cline to assess whether a given plan will run into openrouter errors and if so to develop plan without errors.

…

On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 4:17 PM Donny1717 ***@***.***> wrote: That true sir I burned through 1,500 credits in just six hours after the 5.6 update, even though before this I barely used 200 credits per month. That’s why I keep saying — don’t trust any of these systems until you’re running everything inside your own environment. Once they change the model, the token counter, or enable extra thinking modes without telling you, your usage and costs can spike out of nowhere. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#197089?email_source=notifications&email_token=AK62UWQG6LTZI75LGZJDZST5ORTVJA5CNFSNUABIM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2ENFZWG5LTONUW63SDN5WW2ZLOOQXTCOBUGA3DKNZWUZZGKYLTN5XKOY3PNVWWK3TUUVSXMZLOOSWGM33PORSXEX3DNRUWG2Y#discussioncomment-18406576>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AK62UWSD5PKR2F46T2OVNC35ORTVJAVCNFSNUABIKJSXA33TNF2G64TZHMZTAMJVG4ZTGNBUHNCGS43DOVZXG2LPNY5TCMBRGQZTMMBVUF3AE> . Triage notifications, keep track of coding agent tasks and review pull requests on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://github.com/notifications/mobile/ios/AK62UWVHVSBCO6E6ZA7WRNT5ORTVJA5CNFSNUABIM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2ENFZWG5LTONUW63SDN5WW2ZLOOQXTCOBUGA3DKNZWUZZGKYLTN5XKOY3PNVWWK3TUUVSXMZLOOSVGM33PORSXEX3JN5ZQ> and Android <https://github.com/notifications/mobile/android/AK62UWSRMBRPMHQW2NKOXNL5ORTVJA5CNFSNUABIM5UWIORPF5TWS5BNNB2WEL2ENFZWG5LTONUW63SDN5WW2ZLOOQXTCOBUGA3DKNZWUZZGKYLTN5XKOY3PNVWWK3TUUVSXMZLOOSXGM33PORSXEX3BNZSHE33JMQ>. Download it today! You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[hupo376787]

The only thing we can do is cancel the subscription so Microsoft will wake up

[roy-tong]

@srgglobal From an administrator's seat, the missing artifact is less a communication pack and more a reconciliation rulebook: what got counted, under which unit, and what an invoice's numbers can be checked against. That's what we build in the open — AgentMeasure, a settlement-statement standard for AI usage billing. The concrete object is one page: confirmed units on one line, assumed ones on another, the dollar delta between the two readings, and a named rule behind every figure. Everything runs locally. As someone steering an org through this transition, your read on what's missing for admins would genuinely shape the draft — happy to send the one-pager.

[roy-tong]

@jakteixeiraf Worth pushing with support as a metering accuracy issue, not just a billing complaint: if the model that actually served the request differs from the one you selected, the deduction was computed against the wrong rate, and that's a disputable line item, not a quirk. For context, we audit AI usage metering in the open (110+ tools audited, 45+ verified bugs, 21 fixes merged upstream), and the recurring pattern is logical operations collapsing into physical units — retries, model reroutes and context reloads counted as fresh charges. If you can export request-level usage, separating what you selected from what was executed is exactly the check our conformance rules cover. The checker is free and runs locally.

[roy-tong]

@is-nakano That visibility gap is the one we hear most from org admins: the budget exists and money moves, but there is no per-user, per-unit breakdown you could hand to finance. We maintain an open settlement-statement standard for AI usage billing (github.com/roy-tong/AgentMeasure) — one page, confirmed vs assumed units, the dollar delta, a named rule behind every number, all computed locally. It does not read Copilot billing today; the rule structure is vendor-neutral, and pressure from practitioners like you is what decides which vendor ships a readable statement first. If you want to pressure-test the statement format against a real Copilot invoice, that is exactly the feedback loop we run.

[Donny1717]

Up

[danpingsmile1197-design]

I switched away from subscription-based tools entirely. Now I just use jzstoken.com - pay-per-token, no monthly plans. $20 lasts me about 3 weeks.

The best part is no surprise bills. I can see exactly what I'm spending. And if I have a light week, I don't feel like I'm wasting money on a subscription I barely used.

Way better than the old "pay $20/month whether you use it or not" model.