There are two types of users: those who are able to use subsidized rates, and those who need to use API rates due to audit requirements, enterprise billing, etc.

Model routing for subsidized users takes the form of a "use Opus 5 subagents for implementation" type of system prompt. You lean into a single provider, build tooling around that, and your savings are far beyond anything multi-provider routing can get you.

Model routing for enterprises is far more complex - approaches like https://fireworks.ai/blog/kimik3-fable become necessary for cost control.

It's very common to use a lesser model for a lesser task, resulting in same quality output. End result: save money while being faster. In many cases, it's a pure win-win.

I’m assuming you don’t pay per API call. Every mid-large sized business in the world does.

Sometimes you can get an equivalent result in a fraction of the time using a less capable model.

The problem is of course knowing ahead of time that the faster model can give you the same result.

And you do not have flat priced quota for Fable 5, right? Because nobody has, as far as I know. So you'll probably not route any task to the "current best available SOTA".

Also: quota. Implies you do not have unlimited access even for flat prices. Which in turn implies that as soon as you hit the quota on the most expensive flat price plan, even you will suddenly discover the magic of economically sensible behavior.

Not everyone is you. Other people probably have a range of tasks that can accomplished with different models.

Certainly if I'm confident that I'm going to get what I need from a faster model, that's what I want to use, rather than wasting time grinding away for the sake of saying of the same answer came from a SOTA model.

Given that every chatbot does offer a range of models, it seems clear people do choose among options.

because "less" can be so much faster?

I generally agree. Perhaps there's only a 5% chance that it would write better code or find a bug that it wouldn't have with a lesser model, but the economics of bugs is strong enough that preventing a single bug is worth hundreds of dollars.

> For me, anything other than current best available SOTA for any task is unacceptable.

Then you must route. An article with lots of upvotes yesterday or two days ago showed that K3+Fable 5 was more SOTA than either of those.

I'm not a customer of those routing systems, but I quite often use different Claude models for different tasks. While most tasks were Opus 4.8, I often used 4.8 to make a plan, prompts, and package kit to setup Fable for a bigger project, then run it on Fable. Or, for broad single-task searches Sonnet with or without "Research []" turned on seemed to work best both faster, lower overhead, and less verbose answers (when I didn't want it).

OFC, YMMV

That's nice and all, as long as flat-priced quota continues to exist. Seems unlikely to go on forever!