The Economics of LLMs in 2025: token pricing, on-device costs, and the math of experimentation

Token pricing is changing how teams test LLM workloads. Zed just shifted to a token-based model, and the move is stirring debate about cloud spend and predictability ^[1]. Pricing clarity is welcome for some, puzzling for others, as teams weigh token burn against project goals ^[1].

On the hardware side, budget-minded experimentation is thriving. For ~$1,000, builders are cobbling local rigs and even turning to compact, on-device options that can run mid-size models ^[2]. A used, 64GB M1 Mac Studio is a popular starting point, with others eyeing GPUs like RTX 3090 as a practical ceiling for hobbyist labs ^[2]. Some explain that cloud credits can still beat raw hardware costs if you need scale, but local setups are getting more capable and affordable ^[2].

Local-model economics are flipping from “cloud only” to “local first.” OrKa-reasoning demonstrates 95.6% cost savings with local models versus APIs, pulling off 114K tokens with a multi-agent orchestration approach and showing real enterprise-grade practicality open-sourced on HuggingFace and GitHub ^[3].

Researchers also note the cost of reproducing classic targets. GPT-2 (124M) from scratch ran through a careful, DIY pipeline; a recent run highlights a best-performing gpt2-rope setup with a 2.987 validation loss and 0.320 HellaSwag accuracy, after spending about $200 on compute ^[4].

Bottom line: token pricing, affordable local rigs, and hands-on experimentation math are reshaping how 2025 LLM work gets done.

References