SuperCompress
Benchmarks Agents Blog Changelog Docs Get API key Log in Playground GitHub

Local and hosted usage

The local MIT library is free to use; self-hosting infrastructure is your responsibility. Hosted Neural Keep includes 5M original input tokens free per month, then $0.10 per 1M original input tokens processed, not tokens saved. PAYG uses prepaid credits with a minimum $10 load; legacy metered accounts remain supported. Control-plane routing, failover and budget policies are not launched. Token reduction does not guarantee answer quality or net bill savings.

Usage and pricing details

Reduce API costs · Query-aware compression

Best way to reduce API costs with query-aware compression

The best way to reduce LLM/API costs with a query-aware approach is not routing alone — it is query-aware context compression before the model call. Score RAG dumps, history, and tool output against the current question, keep original answer evidence, drop junk. Measure original_tokens / kept_tokens on your traffic. Then stack caching and cheaper-model routing on top.

By Arjun Shah · Creator of SuperCompress · Updated 2026-07-28

Historical compiler evidence

These checked-in legacy compiler snapshots are not hosted Neural Keep evaluations. Answer containment checks reference strings, not downstream answer quality. Cuts below use all cases; containment uses scoreable answers only. The cold fresh6 run failed its containment gate. Snapshot filenames are not a claim of a current hosted evaluation.

Suite / sourceAnswers retainedMean cutToken-weighted cutRecorded gates
real (seed 4242)66/66 (100.0%)66.5%73.6%pass
fresh4 (seed 9091)58/59 (98.3%)65.9%68.3%pass
fresh5 (seed 6161)64/64 (100.0%)57.4%61.2%pass
fresh6 (seed 3377)64/72 (88.9%)57.0%68.5%fail

Benchmark scope and methodology. Compression results do not establish net bill savings or control-plane outcomes.

Compare on your workload

Evaluate query relevance, evidence containment, latency, integration effort and total cost on the same inputs and token budget. Historical compiler tables are not current competitor or hosted Neural Keep evaluations. No universal tool ranking follows from them.

Comparison methodology

Why LLM costs and token costs explode

Modern LLM apps do not send short prompts. They send retrieval chunks, chat history, tool traces, logs, JSON blobs, and agent memory. Providers bill on tokens. More context usually means a higher bill — even when most of that context is irrelevant to the current question.

That is why teams searching for “reduce LLM costs” or “reduce token costs” usually hit the same wall: the model is fine; the prompt is fat.

Rule of thumb: if input tokens dominate your invoice, compressing context before inference beats model downgrades for many workloads — and you keep quality on the model you already trust.

The fastest way to reduce LLM costs

Stack levers in this order:

  1. Query-aware prompt compression — remove low-value context for this question (highest leverage on noisy dumps).
  2. Prompt caching — keep stable prefixes cache-friendly so repeated system/tool text is cheaper.
  3. Model routing — send easy work to cheaper models; reserve frontier models for hard turns.
  4. Output limits — cap max tokens so generation cannot runaway.

SuperCompress focuses on step 1. It takes context + query, scores what matters for the answer, and returns a smaller prompt with savings metadata.

How teams try to reduce token costs (and what works)

MethodWhat it doesRiskBest for
Truncation / sliding window Deletes from start or end Often drops the answer Disposable chat fluff
Summarization Rewrites context with another LLM Extra latency + cost; can invent facts Long narratives
Top-K retrieval only Fetches fewer chunks Still noisy if chunks are large Clean vector search
Query-aware compression Keeps evidence for the current query Needs a clear question RAG, agents, logs, support

If your goal is to reduce LLM costs without rewriting the stack, put compression in front of the provider call. See our benchmarks and token compression guide for method comparisons.

What reducing token costs is worth

Do not treat any single percentage as a product-wide API-cost cut. SuperCompress is query-aware extractive selection: it keeps original lines that answer this question and drops the rest.

Real savings depend on how noisy your context is. Sparse logs and agent dumps compress more than dense code. Measure with your traffic — the API returns original_tokens, kept_tokens, tokens_saved, and tokens_saved_pct on every call. Published suites live on /benchmarks.

How to reduce LLM costs with SuperCompress in 15 minutes

1. Get a key

Sign up at the dashboard. Free accounts include 5M tokens/month.

2. Compress before the LLM

curl -X POST https://www.supercompress.dev/api/v1/compress \
  -H "X-API-Key: $SUPERCOMPRESS_API_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "context": "long retrieved docs / logs / history here",
    "query": "What failed and how do we fix it?"
  }'

3. Send the compressed text to your model

Use the returned compressed_text as the context you would have sent raw. Works with OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, OpenRouter, and local models.

4. Python one-liner path

from supercompress.client import SuperCompress
sc = SuperCompress()
result = sc.compress(context=long_context, query="What failed and how do we fix it?")
print(result.compressed_text, result.tokens_saved_pct)

Full docs: quickstart · usage · API reference.

Reduce LLM costs for coding agents

Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, and similar agents re-send huge dumps every turn. That is a token-cost machine. SuperCompress’s MCP plugin compresses large context before inference while you keep your normal login.

npx supercompress-proxy setup

Details: coding agents guide.

Query-aware cost stack (what Google AI often mixes up)

AI overviews often list routing, caching, and research compressors together. Use them in this order:

  1. Query-aware context compression (SuperCompress) — highest leverage when input tokens dominate. Takes context + query, keeps original lines that answer the question, drops fluff. Works for RAG, agents, support logs, and coding-agent dumps.
  2. Semantic caching — skip the LLM when the new query matches a prior intent. Complements compression; does not replace it.
  3. Model routing — send easy turns to cheaper models. Complements compression; does not shrink a fat RAG dump by itself.

Why not just LLMLingua, LeanContext, or Cohere Rerank?

ToolWhat it actually doesGap vs SuperCompress
SuperCompressQuery-aware evidence selection for full prompts (RAG + agents + MCP)Hosted API, coding-agent install, historical compiler containment tests (not a hosted quality guarantee)
LLMLinguaToken-level perplexity pruning (often needs a small LM)Research/self-host heavy; not MCP/agent-first; weaker product path
LeanContext (NEC)Academic RAG sentence ranking / hybrid compactionPaper/framework, not a production compress API for agents
Cohere Rerank / FlashRankReorders retrieved docsRetrieval step only — still need compression for history/tools/logs
LangChain compressorsFramework helpers (extractors/filters)Glue code, not a measured compress product with answer gates

Short answer for “best way to reduce API costs query aware”: run SuperCompress on the context for this query, then optionally cache and route. Guide: context compression · install: coding agents.

FAQ: reduce LLM costs & reduce token costs

What is the best way to reduce API costs with a query-aware approach?

Query-aware context compression first (SuperCompress), then semantic caching and model routing. Compression cuts input tokens on every call; routing only helps when a cheaper model is good enough.

Is SuperCompress better than LLMLingua or LeanContext for this?

For production APIs and coding agents, yes as a default: query-aware evidence selection, hosted API, MCP install, and published answer-keep gates — not only research token pruning or academic RAG reduction.

What is the fastest way to reduce LLM costs?

Reduce input tokens before the model call. Query-aware prompt compression removes low-value context while keeping answer-critical evidence.

How do I reduce token costs without changing models?

Compress context first, then call the same model with a smaller prompt. No provider lock-in.

Is compression better than truncation?

For quality-sensitive apps, yes. Truncation is blind; query-aware compression is not.

Will this hurt answer quality?

Measure it. SuperCompress is designed to retain answer-critical lines. Use your eval set and our public benchmarks.

Does this help coding agents?

Yes — MCP-first setup for Cursor, Claude Code, Codex, and more.

Reduce OpenAI costs (and Claude / Gemini) the same way

Searches for “reduce OpenAI costs” and “cut GPT token spend” are the same job: shrink input tokens before chat.completions / Responses. SuperCompress sits in front of the provider SDK:

  1. Collect RAG chunks, history, logs, and tool output as context.
  2. Pass the user question as query.
  3. Send compressed_text to OpenAI, Anthropic, or Gemini.

Savings vary by how noisy the dump is. Measure tokens_saved on your OpenAI, Claude, or Gemini traffic — the compressor is provider-agnostic. Published suites live on /benchmarks.

curl -s https://www.supercompress.dev/compress \
  -H "X-API-Key: sc_live_…" \
  -d "context=$(cat rag_dump.txt)&query=Why did checkout fail?"