Luke Foster

Ideas about Claude Code, development strategies, and research

My 2025 AI Usage Receipt: 14.3 Billion Tokens Later

December 23, 2025 • Tags: ai, claude, codex, analysis, data

I analyzed my AI coding assistant usage from the past few months and turned it into a CVS-style receipt. The numbers surprised even me.

View the full receipt →

The Big Numbers

Over ~90 days across three different AI coding tools:

That last number is the kicker. I paid around $1,200 in subscriptions. Saved $5,554—an 82% discount.

The Breakdown

Claude Code (41 days)

My primary tool. 960 sessions, 106,653 messages. Four different Claude models:

Model API Cost
Claude Opus 4.5 $2,823
Claude Sonnet 4.5 $1,977
Claude Opus 4.1 $467
Claude Haiku 4.5 $37

The ~95% cache hit rate kept costs down significantly. Without caching, this would’ve been astronomical.

Codex CLI (90 days)

934 sessions across GPT-5 variants. Lower volume but consistent use as a secondary coding partner.

Pi Agent (5 days)

The new kid. 240 sessions, 9,315 messages. Multi-model by design—routing between Claude, GPT, Gemini, GLM, and DeepSeek based on task needs.

Fun Facts

Some stats that made me laugh (and maybe reconsider my life choices):

Why This Matters

Two observations:

Subscriptions are a steal. If you’re a power user, the math isn’t even close. $200/month for Claude Max vs. $2,650/month in API costs (extrapolated). The value proposition only improves the more you use it.

This is genuinely new. A year ago, having 100k+ AI-assisted coding conversations in under three months wasn’t possible. The tools didn’t exist. Now they do, and they’re good enough to use as a primary development methodology.

I’m not showing this off to brag about usage. I’m showing it because these numbers represent a fundamental shift in how software gets written.

The receipt format is a joke, but the data isn’t.

See the full receipt →


Receipt generated by Claude, naturally. The irony of using AI to analyze AI usage is not lost on me.