@philipkiely: On sample workloads: Opus 4.8 -> Kimi 2.7 Code | 82% savings GPT 5.5 -> GLM 5.2 | 77% savings Gemini 3.5 Flash -> Nemot…
Summary
A tweet from Philip Kiely highlights cost savings by switching from closed-source AI models to open-source alternatives, using Baseten's ROI calculator tool.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 06/18/26, 02:07 PM
On sample workloads:
Opus 4.8 -> Kimi 2.7 Code | 82% savings GPT 5.5 -> GLM 5.2 | 77% savings Gemini 3.5 Flash -> Nemotron 3 Ultra | 67% savings
Run the numbers for your yourself: https://t.co/nJwPSCZyyT https://t.co/uT3XxNX6v4
Open-Source ROI Calculator | Baseten
Source: https://www.baseten.co/resources/calculator/
See what open source saves you
Compare closed-source API spend against open-source models on Baseten Model APIs.
Projected savings
Enter workload information to calculate your savings.
Savings are estimated based on input and output token usage and approximate cache hit rate.
Results are general estimates intended for internal discussion purposes only. Baseten does not guarantee that use of the Baseten platform will result in any particular amount of cost savings or other financial benefit. Any pricing shown here is for purposes of example only.
Production inferenceruns on Baseten
Serve open-source, custom, and fine-tuned AI models on infra purpose-built for high-performance inference at massive scale.
Try your model on Baseten
Similar Articles
Opus 5 vs Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.6 Sol, tested for free. Model choice was never my problem.
A solo developer tests Opus 5, Opus 4.8, GPT-5.6 Sol and Kimi K3 via a multi-model router with free credit, discovering that evaluation budgets and input preprocessing matter more than raw model choice.
@browser_use: Open-weights models have officially caught up We tried GLM 5.2 in BrowserCode > Near Opus-level score > Cheapest model …
Open-weights models have caught up with proprietary ones, with GLM 5.2 achieving near Opus-level scores in browser agent tasks at low cost. Other models like Minimax M3 and Kimi k2.7 also show notable improvements.
Spending $2.5k/month on Sonnet/Opus — worth switching more to GPT-5.5/Codex?
A user discusses optimizing $2.5k/month spending on AI APIs, comparing Anthropic's Sonnet/Opus with GPT-5.5/Codex for coding and business tasks, seeking community advice on cost-quality tradeoffs.
Open-source models are closing the coding gap with GPT/Claude/Gemini ~1.5x faster than the frontier is advancing, and on decontaminated benchmarks a 27B model already beats Claude Opus 4.8 [live dashboard + analysis]
A live dashboard and statistical analysis shows open-source coding models are closing the gap with closed models at 1.5x the rate, with a 27B model already surpassing Claude Opus on decontaminated benchmarks. Tool-call reliability remains the main bottleneck.
@rohanpaul_ai: Surprising and such a good news for open source coding model, and also that there are lots of hidden chances to reduce …
Databricks tested GLM-5.2, an open-source coding model, and found it competes with top closed models like Claude Opus 4.8 on real enterprise code tasks while being cheaper ($1.28/task vs $1.94/task). The evaluation also highlighted Pi, a harness that reduces costs by sending less context per turn.