Launching today
P402.io
Route, verify, and settle paid API calls with clear traces
73 followers
Route, verify, and settle paid API calls with clear traces
73 followers
Most AI apps waste 70% of their budget. Wrong models. No caching. Payment fees that destroy micropayments. P402.shop: Compare 50+ AI APIs (GPT-5.2, Claude Opus 4.5, Gemini 3, more). Find the right model for your use case. See costs explode from 100 to 1M users. Free. P402.io: Accept micropayments without Stripe's $0.30 killing you. 1% flat fee. Built on x402—HTTP's payment standard, finally working. Vibe-coded apps break at scale. Optimized ones don't.
P402.io
I’ve been waiting for a real implementation of HTTP payment standards that actually works for modern webs apps.
P402.io
@nitesh_kumar98 thanks Nitesh, its true the reason I built this is I saw a major issue using stripe for API calls. Would love to hear your feedback!
-Zeshan
Product Hunt
For model cost optimization, how does P402.io's recommendations compare to just using OpenAI’s or Anthropic’s built‑in cost/perf guidance or tools like OpenRouter’s benchmarks?
P402.io
@curiouskitty Great question
OpenAI/Anthropic's built-in guidance: Inherently limited to their own ecosystem. Anthropic will never tell you "actually, DeepSeek R1 handles this task at 4% of the cost." Their guidance optimizes within their models, not across the market. Same with OpenAI, they'll recommend GPT-5.2 vs GPT-4o, but won't surface that Gemini 2.5 Flash might be 10x cheaper for your specific use case.
OpenRouter: Genuinely good. Their benchmarks are useful for capability comparison. But OpenRouter is a routing/aggregation layer their incentive is throughput, not helping you minimize spend. They show you prices, but don't model what happens to YOUR economics at 100K users vs 1M users. They also don't factor in the payment layer (which is where P402.io comes in).
Where P402.shop is different:
Vendor-agnostic: We have no incentive to push you toward any provider
Scale modeling: Not just "price per token" but "your actual bill at your actual volume"
Task-matching: Recommendations based on use case, not just benchmarks (summarization ≠ reasoning ≠ code gen)
Full-stack view: Model costs are only part of the picture. If you're charging micropayments, Stripe's $0.30 might be bigger than your AI costs
Honestly, use all of them. OpenRouter for capability benchmarks, provider docs for specific features, P402.shop for the cross-provider economics and scale modeling.
We're not trying to replace benchmarks, we're solving the "I'm bleeding money and don't know where" problem.
My Financé
your landing page is really nice! i actually posted internally in slack about how nice it is!
i did notice this unit which is a. very impressive but b. likely a bit off in terms of contrast!
congrats on launching!
P402.io
@catt_marroll thank you for the shoutout on your slack and the heads up. I am pushing a fix for this now, always iterate, really appreciate the feedback!
Comparing 50+ models in one place is helpful. Does the platform handle rate limiting or do you need to manage that on your side?
P402.io
@jacky0729 Thanks for the question! Right now P402.shop is focused on the comparison and cost modeling side, helping you figure out which model fits your use case and what it'll actually cost at scale.
For rate limiting, that's still on you to manage per provider. But it's something we're thinking about as we build out the router layer. The vision is that P402 handles not just payment but the operational stuff too, rate limits, failover, automatic switching when a provider is down or throttling you. Define your constraints once, let the router figure out the rest.
Not there yet, but that's where we're headed. What's your current setup, are you running into rate limit issues across multiple providers?