Compare · Full catalog ranking

The cheapest LLM API, ranked — and why row one is a trap

Every model in the catalog costed on one workload, cheapest first. The spread is enormous, which is exactly why ranking on price alone will pick the wrong model.

All numbers computed from pricing data verified 2026-08-31 — this page updates with every pricing refresh.

The ranking

Every model in our catalog, costed on the same workload — a history-carrying chatbot at 1,000 requests/day, with 8% retries, a 40% cache hit rate, 15% infra overhead, and per-model tokenizer calibration applied. Sorted cheapest first.

#ModelProvider$/moContextCachingBatch
1Amazon Nova Liteaws$10300Kyesyes
2GPT-OSS 20B (Groq)groq$14131K
3Llama 3 8B Litetogether$18128K
4Mistral Small 4mistral$24128Kyesyes
5GPT-OSS 120B (Groq)groq$29131K
6DeepSeek V4 Flashdeepseek$601000Kyesyes
7Mistral Large 3mistral$68128Kyesyes
8Gemini 2.5 Flashgoogle$711000Kyesyes
9Command Rcohere$89128Kyes
10Amazon Nova Proaws$128300Kyesyes
11Llama 3.3 70Btogether$132128K
12GPT-5.4 miniopenai$147272Kyesyes
13GPT-5.4 mini (Azure)azure$147272Kyesyes
14Claude Haiku 4.5anthropic$209200Kyesyes
15GPT-5.4openai$490272Kyesyes
16GPT-5.4 (Azure)azure$490272Kyesyes
17Command R+cohere$501128Kyes
18Claude Sonnet 4.6anthropic$628200Kyesyes

Top to bottom that is a 66× spread on identical work — Amazon Nova Lite at $10/mo against Claude Sonnet 4.6 at $628/mo.

Why the top of this list is a trap

If you stop reading at row one you will pick Amazon Nova Lite and regret it. The cheapest rows here are small models — 8B-class and “lite” tiers — and they are cheap because they are less capable, not because someone is being generous. Our own recommendation engine refuses to recommend budget-tier models for the coding-assistant and multi-model-router archetypes at all, regardless of price.

The failure mode isn’t that a weak model costs more in retries. It’s that on work it can’t do, retries don’t converge — you get a plausible wrong answer, and the cost lands on whoever has to notice and fix it. A ranking by $/call quietly assumes every row can complete the task. Across a 66× spread, that assumption is false.

Cheapest-per-token is only a meaningful ranking within a capability tier. Across tiers it’s comparing a bicycle to a truck on fuel economy. Decide which tier your task actually needs first; then this table is genuinely useful.

Model this yourself

Swap in your own tokens, traffic, and cache hit rate — the ordering changes more than you'd expect.

Open in calculator →

Caching reshuffles the order

6 of the 18 models here support no prompt caching at all. On a workload with a large reusable prefix that is a bigger handicap than a higher sticker price. The cheapest model that supports caching is Amazon Nova Lite at $10/mo — already row one, and its lead only widens as the cache hit rate goes up, because the rows chasing it cannot cache at all.

If you need batch as well — offline pipelines, bulk classification — the cheapest model offering both caching and a batch tier is Amazon Nova Lite at $10/mo. Those two capabilities eliminate more of this table than price does.

Where price isn’t the differentiator

Some rows are exact ties, which means the decision is made on something other than cost:

Identical pricing across a first-party API and its cloud-hosted equivalent is common. Pick on region, compliance posture, billing relationship, and rate limits — the cost model has nothing to say.

How to actually use this table

Rank the catalog on your workload instead of ours — tokens, volume, retries, caching, and growth.

Open the calculator →

Related