WeSearch

Cache hit rates of Inference are more meaningful than the headline costs

·19 min read · 0 reactions · 0 comments · 29 views
Cache hit rates of Inference are more meaningful than the headline costs
TL;DR · WeSearch summary

The article discusses the significance of cache hit rates in the context of long multi-turn conversations with language models. It highlights that agents push the entire conversation history into context, making cache efficiency crucial for cost management. An analysis of over 60 providers reveals that cache hit rates are often overlooked yet play a vital role in determining overall processing costs.

Key facts
How this story was covered

2 outlets in our directory ran this story. All of the coverage we found sits in one bucket: centre. That one-sidedness is itself worth noticing.

Centre · 1
About this source

Hacker News (Newest) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 5,306 of its stories.

Original article
Dirac
Read full at Dirac →

Story provenance

Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →

Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.

Record

Original publisherDirac
Canonical URLhttps://dirac.run/posts/cache-hit-rates-agents
Publication timeSat, 23 May 2026 18:30:55 +0000
Retrieval time2026-05-23T18:37:27.620Z
Last seen2026-05-23T18:37:27.620Z
Headline sourcePublisher (no WeSearch rewrite)
Excerpt sourcepublisher body
Excerpt methodFirst ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited.
SummaryWeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer)
Summary source textcontentText
Citation coverageSummary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL.
ClusterY1dMxU_9vy5V · 2 stories
Cluster logicGrouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison.
Ranking reasonStory pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking.
Publisher visitYes — open original
Substitutes article?No — link-out required for full text

Rights status (four layers)

Publisher-declared
No publisher-confirmed rights record for this source yet.
Machine-readable
No source-specific machine-readable restriction detected beyond the public feed.
WeSearch interpretation
WeSearch declared handling (basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed). This is WeSearch policy, not a legal grant on the publisher's behalf.
Unknown
Retrieval and training permissions are not asserted unless the publisher confirms them.

WeSearch handling by dimension

Indexing May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? Allowed
Snippet May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? Allowed
AI summary May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? Limited
Retrieval / RAG May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? Not asserted
Model training May the content be used to train AI models? Not asserted
Commercial reuse May the content be reused commercially? Not permitted

Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.

Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand

.pct-high { color: #10b981; font-weight: 700; } .pct-mid { color: #f59e0b; font-weight: 700; } .pct-low { color: #ef4444; font-weight: 700; } .callout { @apply p-6 rounded-2xl border mb-8; } Tl;Dr: Agents push the full conversation history into context every turn; hence, over a large number of turns, they are extremely read heavy, which in turn is why cache hit rates are an important factor. This post is an analysis of 60+ providers and their cache hit rates using 398 data points. All data sourced from openrouter.ai model pages. Agentic workflows are different from most human-LLM conversations in one key characteristic: the number of turns on average are far higher. Context processing over multi-turn conversation grows quadratically.

Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Dirac.

Anonymous · no account needed
Share 𝕏 Facebook Reddit LinkedIn Threads WhatsApp Bluesky Mastodon Email

Discussion

0 comments

More from Dirac