Field noteOct 25, 20261 min read1 source

A Habr article by SopranoDev sets out a method for estimating the actual cost of an LLM API call rather than

In one minute

A Habr article by SopranoDev sets out a method for estimating the actual cost of an LLM API call rather than multiplying a headline per-token price by an expected volume.

What changed: Раскрывает практический способ считать фактическую стоимость вызова: учитывать кэш, reasoning-токены и длину контекста, а не только цену за токен.

Its formula separates uncached input, cached-input reads, cache writes, visible output, and reasoning tokens. The article says output is commonly priced four to eight times above input across the current offerings it reviewed from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google. It also notes that cache-read discounts and cache-write prices can differ by provider and cache duration.

The piece compares usage fields across OpenAI Chat Completions and Responses, Anthropic Messages, and Gemini generateContent. For OpenAI and Gemini, cached tokens are included in the reported input total; Anthropic reports the post-cache input tail separately. It says reasoning tokens are included in output for OpenAI and Anthropic, while Gemini thought tokens must be added to candidate output tokens for a comparable calculation.

The source does not provide a universal bill estimate, benchmark a particular workload, or establish that one provider is cheaper. Its stated prices and conditions were checked on 18 October 2026 and may change.

Evidence / sources

  1. 1habr.com/ru/articles/1098318?amp%3Butm_medium=rss&amp%3Butm_source=habrahabr
All Field Notes

Next reads

Read next

Open the graph
  1. 01topicAnthropicExplore the anthropic topic hub.
  2. 02topicGeminiExplore the gemini topic hub.
  3. 03archiveField NotesOpen the latest editorial analysis.
  4. 04source ledgerSource LedgerInspect the public source evidence graph.
Who read this page?Machine requests, hidden until opened

Loading the privacy-safe route aggregate...

Open the JSON contract