Hello, I’m having a hard time figuring out how many tokens I would need if I’m building a simple web app that uses a chatbot through the OpenAI API. There are a lot of models available, and I’m not really sure which one to use. The app I’m building is a school project, so I don’t expect many people to use it.

Essentially, the idea is that users would ask the app specific questions, and if they tell the chat to “save” the response, it would call a function to store it.
Also, if I’m testing the responses, would that use up tokens? Or is there a free way to test responses from the API?

Well, I've been studying OpenAI's business moves lately. They seem to be shifting away from their open-source roots and focusing more on pleasing investors than regular users.

Looking at this pricing table, we can see their current model lineup:

• o1-pro: A beefed-up version of o1 with more compute power

• GPT-4.5: Their "largest and most capable GPT model"

• o1: Their high-intelligence reasoning model

The pricing structure really stands out:

• o1-pro output tokens cost a whopping $600 per million

• GPT-4.5 is $150 per million output tokens

• o1 is relatively cheaper at $60 per million output tokens

Honestly, that price gap between models is pretty striking. The thing is, input tokens are expensive too - $150 per million for o1-pro compared to just $15 for the base o1 model.

So, comparing this to competitors:

• Deepseek-r1 charges only around $2.50 for similar output

• The qwq-32b model scores better on benchmarks and runs on regular computers

The context window sizes are interesting too:

• Both o1 models offer 200,000 token windows

• GPT-4.5 has a smaller 128,000 token window

• All support reasoning tokens, but have different speed ratings

Basically, OpenAI is using a clear market segmentation strategy here. They're creating distinct tiers with significant price jumps between each level.

Anyway, this approach makes more sense when you see it laid out - they're not just charging high prices across the board. They're offering options at different price points, though even their "budget" o1 model is pricier than many alternatives.

So I'm curious - do you think this tiered pricing strategy will work in the long run? Or will more affordable competitors eventually capture more of the market?