r/openrouter
OpenRouter can charged 3x more because of provider routing ,be careful!
- upvotes
- 8
- comments
- 19
Post
Highlighted: the lines this signal was extracted from
I think OpenRouter needs to make provider-specific pricing much more obvious, especially for cache-heavy coding agents. I exported my Activity CSV after running DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 through a coding agent. My results for roughly 8 hours 15 minutes: 1,175 requests 123.86M prompt tokens 115.75M cached tokens 93.45% cache ratio $7.82 actually charged The surprising part was the provider routing: Parasail: 687 requests - $6.15 NextBit: 482 requests - $1.65 Baidu: 5 requests StreamLake: 1 request I had been looking at the attractive DeepSeek/OpenRouter pricing and assumed the actual cost would be somewhere around that level. But Parasail charges $0.07/M for cache reads, while StreamLake is currently around $0.017/M for the same DeepSeek V4 Flash 0423 model. Using the exact token profile from my Activity export, I calculate that the same workload pinned to StreamLake would have cost roughly $2.78 instead of $7.82. That's about almost 3× the cost simply because of provider routing. This matters enormously for coding agents because almost all of the context gets repeatedly read from cache. In my case, more than 93% of input tokens were cached. What makes it even more striking is that newer DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 endpoints currently have cache-read prices as low as ~$0.00182/M on StreamLake. I'm not saying OpenRouter is adding a hidden markup. I understand that...
Keep reading with a free account
The rest of this post, and every signal for DeepSeek, is in your free account.