Google Gemini
CE 86 free tierDrafting and retrieval inside Docs and Gmail, where the model needs the file already open rather than one you paste in.
Subscriptions, per-token rate cards and open weights you host yourself: LLM vendors sell in three different currencies, and we scored all three from the vendors' own 2026 pages. Free tiers, usage multipliers and the surcharges that never reach a headline rate are called out where we found them.
An LLM is sold by the seat or by the million tokens, and among 21 vendors the middle monthly plan starts at $8.50. The floor sits at $5.99, the highest starting plan at $30, and 15 vendors ask nothing to begin with. The rest sell no subscription. They meter by the token, or they hand you the weights.
Ranked by a transparency score: pricing transparency 60%, user satisfaction 40%. Capability is not scored. It is the condition grid below. Prices are read from vendor pricing pages and re-checked per product on the dates shown. ComparEdge sells no language models and takes no payment for placement. How the score is built.
Read the grid as a price axis first, then as a capability check: vision, web search, JSON mode, fine-tuning, and open weights that run in house. The last two columns are money rather than features: whether anything is free to start on, and whether we found a price on every tier.
Reading the console
Rows follow our transparency score, not model quality: a small vendor listing one flat rate outranks a frontier lab whose enterprise tier stays sealed. The axis plots only vendors selling a monthly subscription. Vendors that meter by the token show a rate-card band, and models whose weights cost nothing to license show a free band. Neither is a mark against them. Our score treats all three as pricing you can act on, and the meter further down carries the per-million-token rates themselves.
Scroll the console sideways to reach the remaining conditions.
The shortlist ranks by what the plan actually costs your team, not by list price. Flat plans are folded into a per-team number so they compare like for like. Only vendors rated 85 and up are eligible.
For 6 seats at $9 per seat, start with these
Ranked by monthly team cost, vendors rated 85 and up · Your ceiling for this team: $54 / mo
Google Gemini
CE 86 free tierDrafting and retrieval inside Docs and Gmail, where the model needs the file already open rather than one you paste in.
Meta AI
CE 86 free tierQuick answers and images inside the messaging apps already open on the phone.
Hugging Face
CE 91 free tierWorking with open models day to day, pulling weights, fine-tuning them and publishing a demo without wiring up hosting yourself.
Subscriptions above are the seat you sit in; these are the rates your code pays. Vendor-published API prices, US$ per million tokens. 17 of 21 vendors put a card on the record.
| Vendor | Cheapest model in / out per 1M | Flagship in / out per 1M | Max context |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amazon Nova6 models | Nova Micro$0.04 / $0.14 | Nova Premier$2.50 / $12.50 | 1M |
| Cohere2 models | Command R7B$0.04 / $0.15 | Command A$2.50 / $10 | 256K |
| Command R+2 models | Command R7B$0.04 / $0.15 | Command A$2.50 / $10 | 256K |
| Groq6 models | Llama 3.1 8B Instant$0.05 / $0.08 | Qwen 3.6 27B$0.60 / $3 | 131K |
| Replicate1 models | Various models$0.10 / $0.50 | — | — |
| DeepSeek2 models | DeepSeek-V4-Flash$0.14 / $0.28 | DeepSeek-V4-Pro$0.44 / $0.87 | 1M |
| Phi-31 models | Phi-3 Medium (Azure)$0.14 / $0.56 | — | — |
| Kimi8 models | moonshot-v1-8k$0.20 / $2 | kimi-k3$3 / $15 | 1.048M |
| OpenAI API5 models | GPT-5 Mini$0.25 / $2 | GPT-5.5$5 / $30 | 400K |
| ChatGPT4 models | GPT-5 Mini$0.25 / $2 | GPT-5.5$5 / $30 | 400K |
| Google AI Studio2 models | Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.30 / $2.50 | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 / $10 | — |
| Mistral AI1 models | Mistral Large 3$0.50 / $1.50 | — | 128K |
| Anthropic API (Claude)4 models | Haiku 4.5$1 / $5 | Opus 4.8$5 / $25 | 1M |
| Claude4 models | Haiku 4.5$1 / $5 | Fable 5$10 / $50 | 1M |
| Google Gemini3 models | Gemini 2.5 Pro$1.25 / $10 | Gemini 3.1 Pro$2 / $12 | 1M |
| Mistral Large1 models | Mistral Large$2 / $6 | — | 128K |
| Grok 21 models | Grok 2$2 / $10 | — | 128K |
Open a record and the plans appear as the vendor publishes them, with a check date against every figure. A vendor with nothing monthly to sell gets an entry line naming the token card or the open-weight route instead.
Transparency scorePricing transparency 60%User satisfaction 40%
High-volume inference for teams whose data already sits in AWS, billed on the account that carries everything else. The cheapest models in the line are built for batch work, and the flexible mode runs at about half the standard rate.
Critical gapThe model demonstrates inconsistent competitive performance in complex instruction following benchmarks.
Amazon Nova: expert take
Three units of account inside one product line: tokens for the language models, an image for Canvas, an hour of work for Act. Parallel agents each bill separately, so a fan-out multiplies the hourly charge instead of sharing it.
Where Amazon Nova holds up
Founded 2023Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Nova Micro | $0.04 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova Lite | $0.06 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova Pro | $0.80 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova Premier | $2.50 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova 2 Lite | $0.30 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova 2 Pro (Preview) | $1.25 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova Canvas | $0.04 / image | Not published |
| Nova Sonic | $3.40 / 1M tok | Not published |
| Nova Act | $4.75 / hr | Not published |
Near-frontier reasoning where the API line item decides which vendor wins. Kimi runs five consumer steps from free to the top, with about a fifth off each paid step when you pay yearly.
Critical gapAlways-on reasoning makes it verbose, so output-token cost runs high.
Kimi: expert take
A cache hit drops the input rate tenfold, automatically, with no storage fee and no expiry attached, which is the part worth designing for. The API sits as its own line inside the same consumer price grid, priced per million tokens.
Where Kimi holds up
Founded 2023Verified July 17, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Adagio | Free | Free |
| Moderato | $19 | $15 |
| Allegretto | $39 | $31 |
| Allegro | $99 | $79 |
| Vivace | $199 | $159 |
| API Pay-as-you-go | $3 / 1M input tokens | Not published |
Working with open models day to day, pulling weights, fine-tuning them and publishing a demo without wiring up hosting yourself. Hugging Face is a hub rather than a model, so the paid steps buy room to run and store.
Critical gapThe interface demands significant technical expertise for deployment.
Hugging Face: expert take
The paid step buys machine time, not a model: the daily GPU quota goes from five minutes to forty, with a terabyte of private storage attached. Egress and CDN carry no separate charge, which is unusual for a host storing this much.
Where Hugging Face holds up
4.7CE scoreG2 4.6 · 5 reviewsCapterra 4.5Founded 2016Verified July 16, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| PRO | $9 | Not published |
| Team | $20 | Not published |
| Enterprise | $50 | Not published |
Enterprise search and retrieval that has to stay inside one legal jurisdiction. Cohere sells the parts around the model, embeddings, reranking and parsing, and prices each part separately instead of folding them into a plan.
Critical gapThe model produces inconsistent outputs during complex reasoning tasks.
Cohere: expert take
Rerank arithmetic is where the bill surprises people: one search counts as a single request with up to a hundred documents, but any document over five hundred tokens is split, and each piece then counts as its own document.
Where Cohere holds up
4.6CE scoreG2 4.5 · 6 reviewsCapterra 4.4Founded 2019Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Command A | $2.50 / per 1M input tokens | Not published |
| Command R | $0.15 / per 1M input tokens | Not published |
| Command R7B | $0.04 / per 1M input tokens | Not published |
| Embed v3 | $0.10 / per 1M input tokens | Not published |
| Rerank v3 | $2 / per 1M tokens | Not published |
Drafting and retrieval inside Docs and Gmail, where the model needs the file already open rather than one you paste in. Gemini's advantage is proximity: the model sits inside the apps and files the work already lives in.
Critical gapThe platform fails to provide native meeting recording features within the free tier.
Google Gemini: expert take
The tier gates credits rather than model access: a hundred a month on free, a thousand in the middle, twenty-five thousand at the top. Part of the same payment buys Google One storage shared with mail and photos, so some of it is gigabytes.
Where Google Gemini holds up
4.5CE scoreG2 4.4 · 22 reviewsCapterra 4.2Founded 2023Verified July 16, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| AI Plus | $7.99 | Not published |
| AI Pro | $19.99 | Not published |
| AI Ultra | $99.99 | Not published |
Shipping a standard AI feature this week, with SDKs and a playground that behave. Nothing is sold as a subscription: the account meters from the first call, and only the enterprise line withholds a number.
Critical gapThe system produces inconsistent outputs during high-volume summarization tasks.
OpenAI API: expert take
Pricing comes in layers rather than tiers: batch and flex run about half of standard, priority costs more, and endpoints with regional data handling add a tenth on the newer models. The same models bought through a marketplace bill on someone else's terms.
Where OpenAI API holds up
4.8CE scoreG2 4.7 · 11 reviewsCapterra 4.8Founded 2020Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Pay-as-you-go | $0 | Not published |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Quick answers and images inside the messaging apps already open on the phone. Meta only began selling a paid tier this year, and it is arriving one country at a time, so what you can buy depends on where you are.
Critical gapThe interface presents a steep learning curve for complex campaigns.
Meta AI: expert take
The free tier is where the ads live: the plan card says so outright, and warns it may slow or skip heavy jobs when the service is busy. No public API and no token price exist on the consumer side, so developers get pointed at open weights.
Where Meta AI holds up
4.4CE scoreG2 4.3 · 5,666 reviewsCapterra 4.3Founded 2023Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Meta One Plus | $7.99 | Not published |
| Meta One Premium | $19.99 | Not published |
| Meta One Essential | $14.99 | Not published |
| Meta One Advanced | $49.99 | Not published |
Multilingual and coding work on machines you already run, where the licence has to cost nothing. The coding variant is why most teams pick this family: it does more than its parameter count suggests, and the weights stay downloadable.
Critical gapThe model underperforms against proprietary alternatives during complex architectural reasoning tasks.
Qwen 2.5: expert take
The flagship generation has quietly left the vendor's own commercial list, displaced by the next one, and the only live figure for the larger model now comes from a third-party marketplace. The open weights are still there to download.
Where Qwen 2.5 holds up
Founded 2023Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Open Source | Free | Free |
| API (Alibaba Cloud DashScope) | Contact sales | |
Voice agents and live chat, where a second of latency is the whole product. Groq serves open models on an OpenAI-compatible API, so adopting it is a config change and not a rebuild. Its developer tier lifts rate limits tenfold without publishing a price.
Groq: expert take
Caching costs nothing to enable; the discount is simply a lower rate on hits, about half. Speech recognition charges a minimum of ten seconds per request, so a two-second clip pays for ten, and compound systems stack server-side tool charges on top of model rates.
Where Groq holds up
Founded 2016Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Developer | Contact sales | |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Precision work on long inputs: contract review, large refactors, anything where drifting off the spec is dearer than the tokens. No subscription exists here at all, and what you pay is what the model reads and writes.
Anthropic API (Claude): expert take
Caching cuts both ways. A cache hit costs about a tenth of base input, but writing to the cache costs more than the input itself, a quarter more on the short-lived tier and double on the long one. Reused prompts win, one-shot calls do not.
Where Anthropic API (Claude) holds up
4.8CE scoreG2 4.7 · 297 reviewsCapterra 4.6Founded 2021Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Pro | $20 | $17 |
| Max | $100 | Not published |
| Max x20 | Contact sales | |
| Team | $20 | Not published |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Volumes where the inference bill outgrows the engineer running it: high-volume coding, step-by-step reasoning, long multilingual jobs. DeepSeek sells nothing by the month. You top up a balance and it drains by the token.
Critical gapThe architecture requires constant internet connectivity, preventing secure offline local deployment.
DeepSeek: expert take
The flagship is the throttled one: V4-Pro allows five hundred concurrent requests against two and a half thousand on Flash, so the bigger model is the narrower pipe. Cache hits are the deepest discount in this category, roughly fifty times cheaper than a miss.
Where DeepSeek holds up
4.7CE scoreG2 4.6 · 14 reviewsCapterra 4.6Founded 2023Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| API Pay-as-you-go | Contact sales | |
Once a chat box stops holding the work: long drafts, research files, a codebase pasted in whole with a spec that has to survive it. Team plans have a floor of five seats and a ceiling of 150, which prices Claude for a working group rather than an entire company.
Critical gapAPI rate limits hinder high-volume, automated production system integration.
Claude: expert take
Claude names its meter inside a consumer plan, which is rare: Pro runs on a five-hour window worth roughly forty-four thousand tokens, ten to forty prompts. On the enterprise tier the pretence drops and usage bills at standard API rates.
Where Claude holds up
4.7CE scoreG2 4.6 · 297 reviewsCapterra 4.5Founded 2023Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Pro | $20 | $17 |
| Max 5x | $100 | Not published |
| Max 20x | $200 | Not published |
| Team Standard | $25 | $20 |
| Team Premium | $125 | $100 |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Everyday drafting, rewriting and quick lookups for one person or a handful of colleagues who want a single assistant across all of it. Ten messages every five hours is where the free plan runs out, so the cheap paid step arrives sooner than people expect.
Critical gapThe model produces inaccurate mathematical calculations and unreliable citations during complex, data-heavy research tasks.
ChatGPT: expert take
The $7 Go plan is the cheap step that can carry advertising, which the plan card says outright. Above it the ladder stops selling features and starts selling multiples of Plus usage, five times and twenty times, each at its own price.
Where ChatGPT holds up
4.8CE scoreG2 4.7 · 2,268 reviewsCapterra 4.6Founded 2022Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Go | $7 | Not published |
| Plus | $20 | Not published |
| Pro 5x | $120 | Not published |
| Pro 20x | $200 | Not published |
| Codex | Contact sales | |
| Business | $25 | $20 |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Putting an open-source model behind an API without owning a GPU or a serving stack. Replicate keeps a cost estimate on each model's page, so the money question gets answered where you choose the model.
Critical gapThe platform lacks production support and exposes developers to high-cost, inefficient execution.
Replicate: expert take
One vendor, two billing currencies: some models bill hardware by the second, others bill input and output tokens, and which one applies is a property of the model rather than your account. Multi-GPU capacity opens only under a spend commitment.
Where Replicate holds up
4.4CE scoreG2 4.3 · 110 reviewsCapterra 4.4Founded 2021Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Pay-as-you-go | $0 | Not published |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Retrieval with grounded citations and a couple of tool calls behind it, inside an enterprise stack. Command R+ carries exactly one line of pricing, consumption, which leaves nothing to compare but the rate itself.
Command R+: expert take
The ceiling hides in the limits line: the context window runs to 128k tokens while output stops at four thousand, which quietly caps what a single call can return. Output is priced four times input on that same line.
Where Command R+ holds up
4.6CE scoreG2 4.5 · 83 reviewsCapterra 4.2Founded 2024Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Command R+ Usage | Contact sales | |
The first hour of a project, when the only thing to settle is whether the prompt works at all. AI Studio hands over a free key and a build flow; paid access switches on only after you buy credits up front, with a floor on that first purchase.
Critical gapThe platform lacks offline local execution capabilities for secure internal development environments.
Google AI Studio: expert take
Surcharges outnumber discounts on this one. Priority runs about double standard, a prompt past two hundred thousand tokens doubles the rate again on the larger models, and cached context is billed for storage by the hour rather than per hit.
Where Google AI Studio holds up
4.3CE scoreG2 4.2 · 1,028 reviewsCapterra 4.4Founded 2023Verified July 16, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Paid Tier | Contact sales | |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Teams that must keep data in Europe or on their own machines and want to match model size to the task. Mistral publishes open weights and a hosted flagship together, so self-hosting and API work sit under one roof.
Critical gapPerformance drops during complex reasoning and long-context conversation windows.
Mistral AI: expert take
The $24.99 Team plan is not the whole team price: a base account fee sits on top of the per-user rate, so the seat figure understates the invoice. Document recognition run in batch costs about half the standard rate.
Where Mistral AI holds up
4.6CE scoreG2 4.5 · 13 reviewsCapterra 4.4Founded 2023Verified July 16, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| Pro | $14.99 | Not published |
| Team | $24.99 | Not published |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
| Education | $5.99 | Not published |
Structured workflows that have to stay on European infrastructure: function calling, JSON output, a flagship kept in region. Consumer plans and API access are sold as separate lines under the same name.
Critical gapUsers report a lack of creativity and bland output.
Mistral Large: expert take
The $5.99 Mistral Pro (Student) plan is the interesting line: the same consumer product at well under half the standard rate, proof of enrolment required. Twelve months is the cap on it, after which the student rate expires.
Where Mistral Large holds up
4.4CE scoreG2 4.3 · 13 reviewsCapterra 4.2Founded 2024Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Mistral Free | Free | Free |
| Mistral Pro | $14.99 | Not published |
| Mistral Pro (Student) | $5.99 | Not published |
| API (Mistral Large) | Contact sales | |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
Current-events work that needs the live feed rather than a training cut-off, with image generation sitting beside the chat. Grok's paid steps buy compute priority rather than new features, so what you are choosing is how hard you plan to push it.
Grok 2: expert take
The personal ladder makes one jump and it is tenfold: $30 SuperGrok to $300 SuperGrok Heavy, with nothing in between. A Business seat costs the same $30 as a personal one, so the organisation pays no premium here.
Where Grok 2 holds up
4.3CE scoreG2 4.2Capterra 4.1Founded 2024Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Free | Free | Free |
| SuperGrok | $30 | Not published |
| SuperGrok Heavy | $300 | Not published |
| Business | $30 | Not published |
| Enterprise | Contact sales | |
On-device and edge work where a small footprint and tight instruction-following beat raw breadth. The family ships seven variants under one listing, none of them carrying a plan price, which leaves the rate card as the whole commercial story.
Phi-3: expert take
Fine-tuning is billed in three separate layers here: training per million tokens, hosting by the hour, and inference on top of both. The two medium variants cost the same whether you take the short or the long context window.
Where Phi-3 holds up
4.1CE scoreG2 4Capterra 4Founded 2024Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Phi-3-mini-4k-instruct | Contact sales | |
| Phi-3-mini-128k-instruct | Contact sales | |
| Phi-3.5-mini-instruct | Contact sales | |
| Phi-3-small-8k-instruct | Contact sales | |
| Phi-3-small-128k-instruct | Contact sales | |
| Phi-3-medium-4k-instruct | Contact sales | |
| Phi-3-medium-128k-instruct | Contact sales | |
Running a model where nothing leaves your network and no vendor sits in the loop. Llama's weights cost nothing to license until the service using them reaches hundreds of millions of monthly users, at which point the licence stops being free.
Critical gapThe deployment process demands high technical overhead and extensive documentation for effective model integration.
Llama (Meta): expert take
The rates attached to this model belong to a third-party host, not to Meta: the first-party API is waitlisted and publishes no price at all. What you actually pay for is your own hardware, which is the only meter that applies.
Where Llama (Meta) holds up
4.7CE scoreG2 4.6 · 152 reviewsCapterra 4.7Founded 2023Verified July 8, 2026
| Plan | Monthly | Annual |
|---|---|---|
| Open Weights | Free | Free |
| Enterprise License | Contact sales | |
What the records say
Amazon Nova publishes no monthly figure, so there is no team bill to line up against Kimi.
Kimi carries 4 of the 5 capability columns on the record; Amazon Nova shows 3.
Kimi runs a free tier to start on; Amazon Nova does not.
Both publish every tier they sell.
On the meter, Amazon Nova starts at $0.04 in / $0.14 out per million tokens; Kimi starts at $0.20 / $2.
Pick Amazon Nova for: High-volume inference for teams whose data already sits in AWS, billed on the account that carries everything else.
Pick Kimi for: Near-frontier reasoning where the API line item decides which vendor wins.
Amazon Nova
CE 100Verified July 8, 2026
Kimi
CE 100Verified July 17, 2026
Both price lists on the category axis
Where they differ
Only Amazon Nova has on the record
Only Kimi has on the record
Discounts get advertised. Surcharges do not. Priority service runs at a premium over the standard rate. A prompt past two hundred thousand tokens can double the rate on the larger models. Endpoints that keep processing inside one region add a percentage on newer models. Writing to a prompt cache is dearer than the input it saves, and speech recognition bills a floor of ten seconds however short the clip.
None of that reaches the headline figure. Treat the rate as the floor of the meter, then go hunting for the modifiers, because they decide whether your estimate resembles the invoice.
Aggregated token charts age badly and rarely say when they were built. Every number here comes with the date of its last check at the source that sets it. Where nothing is printed, nothing is invented, and no marketplace listing is quietly promoted into a vendor price. One card in the catalog belongs to a third-party host rather than the model's own maker, so we keep it off the meter.
What is worth checking is not the second decimal on a rate. It is whether the price came from the maker, whether anyone read it recently, and whether the tiers underneath it were opened at all.
Work out which of the two things you are buying before you compare anything. A monthly seat and a per-million-token card answer different questions, and a figure from one tells you nothing about the other. Most teams end up paying both. The subscription covers the people, the card covers the code.
The trap sits on either side. Consumer tiers sell multiples of usage rather than a better model, so the step up buys headroom you cannot see until you hit it. On the card side the headline is the input rate, while output is where the bill actually lands. What we score is disclosure, not model quality. A vendor that gives its weights away scores well on openness and still leaves you the entire hardware bill.
Still weighing it? Answer 5 questions, take a shortlist.
How this review is made. Prices are read from vendor pricing pages and re-checked on the dates shown against each product. Condition columns reflect the feature set recorded on the vendor’s own pages on that date. ComparEdge sells no language models and takes no vendor payment for placement. Where a vendor publishes nothing, this page says so rather than estimating. Ranking is by transparency score: pricing transparency 60%, user satisfaction 40%. What a product can do is shown in the condition columns and carries no weight in the number.