Skip to content

[FEATURE]: Adjust Go usage limits after DeepSeek V4 Pro permanent 75% price reduction #28846

Closed as not planned

Description

@icocoon

Feature hasn't been suggested before.

  • I have verified this feature I'm about to request hasn't been suggested before.

Describe the enhancement you want to request

Adjust OpenCode Go subscription usage limits to reflect the permanent 75% reduction in DeepSeek V4 Pro API pricing.

Problem

DeepSeek officially announced that the V4 Pro model price will be permanently adjusted to 1/4 of the original price after May 31, 2026.

From the official pricing page, footnote (3):

"The deepseek-v4-pro model API pricing will be officially adjusted to 1/4 of the original price after the 75% discount promotion ends on 2026/05/31 15:59 UTC."

Price comparison:

  • Cache-miss input: $1.74 → $0.435 / 1M tokens (75% off permanently)
  • Cache-hit input: $0.0145 → $0.003625 / 1M tokens (90% off permanently)
  • Output: $3.48 → $0.87 / 1M tokens (75% off permanently)

Additionally, cache-hit input prices across ALL models were permanently reduced to 1/10 of original on April 26, 2026.

The current Go plan limits ($12/5h window, $30/week, $60/month) were set when API costs were 4x higher. DeepSeek V4 Pro is one of Go's primary models, and these cost savings should benefit subscribers.

Proposal

Adjust Go plan usage limits upward to reflect the lower underlying API costs:

  • 5-hour window: increase from ~$12 to at least maintain current token volume (the $12 now buys 4x more tokens)
  • Weekly/Monthly caps: proportional adjustment
  • Alternatively, reduce the subscription price to reflect the cost savings

This keeps Go competitive and ensures subscribers benefit from the industry-wide price reductions rather than the savings being absorbed entirely by the platform.

Related

Activity

  1. github-actions commented on May 22, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    This issue doesn't fully meet our contributing guidelines.

    What needs to be fixed:

    • No issue template was used. This appears to be a feature request or question — please resubmit using the appropriate template:
      • Feature Request: title must start with [FEATURE]:, include a verification checkbox and description of the problem/need
      • Question: must include a filled-in Question field

    Please edit this issue to address the above within 2 hours, or it will be automatically closed.


    This issue might be a duplicate of existing issues. Please check:

    If you believe this was flagged incorrectly, please let a maintainer know.

  2. changed the title [-]Go plan: DeepSeek V4 Pro permanently reduced to 1/4 price — can usage limits be adjusted?[/-] [+][FEATURE]: Adjust Go usage limits after DeepSeek V4 Pro permanent 75% price reduction[/+] on May 22, 2026
  3. github-actions commented on May 22, 2026

    @github-actions
    Contributor

    Thanks for updating the issue! It now follows the contributing guidelines and the needs:compliance label has been removed. We appreciate you taking the time to revise it.

  4. CNiMaster commented on May 22, 2026

    @CNiMaster

    附议

  5. starboundscientist-hue commented on May 23, 2026

    @starboundscientist-hue

    Would be great to get an official confirmation on this either way. The uncertainty is slightly unsettling

  6. linchengyuan commented on May 23, 2026

    @linchengyuan

    Here is a detailed reverse-calculation confirming the issue, with references.

    DeepSeek V4 Pro official pricing timeline

    Date Change Cache Hit (per 1M) Cache Miss (per 1M) Output (per 1M)
    Apr 24 (launch) Original pricing $0.145 $1.74 $3.48
    Apr 26 Cache hit reduced to 1/10 $0.0145 $1.74 $3.48
    Apr 26 V4 Pro 75% off starts $0.003625 $0.435 $0.87
    May 22 75% made permanent $0.003625 $0.435 $0.87

    What OpenCode Go currently charges (reverse-calculated)

    From the Go docs (updated May 23, still showing old quotas):

    • 3,450 requests per 5h
    • 750 input (cache miss) + 82,000 cached + 290 output tokens per request
    • $12/5h limit
    Item Per-request tokens Implied price Per-request cost
    Cache miss input 750 $1.74/M (original) $0.001305
    Cache hit input 82,000 $0.0145/M (1/10 cache reduction only) $0.001189
    Output 290 $3.48/M (original) $0.001009
    Total 83,040 ~$0.00350

    3,450 × $0.00350 = $12.08 ≈ $12/5h ✓

    At the current permanent discounted price (~$0.000876/request), the same $12 should allow ~13,700 requests — 75% more than the current 3,450.

    Also worth noting: OpenCode has adjusted these numbers before. Commit #24575 (Apr 27) increased V4 Pro from 1,300 to 3,450 after DeepSeek reduced cache hit pricing. So the mechanism exists — it just hasnt been applied to the 75% discount.

    cc @CNiMaster @starboundscientist-hue

  7. maple-j commented on May 24, 2026

    @maple-j

    附议

  8. Kinsue commented on May 24, 2026

    @Kinsue

    Absolutely

  9. qq78781966 commented on May 25, 2026

    @qq78781966

    +1

  10. daidaiJ commented on May 25, 2026

    @daidaiJ

    +1 ,应该定时同步官方定价的变化,

    There is a mismatch between actual token consumption calculation and displayed billing amount.Consumption details:
    Total input tokens: 367391
    Cached tokens: 335232
    Thinking tokens: 4182
    Output tokens: 6296
    The calculated cost based on DeepSeek official price ( approximately $0.0207) is inconsistent with the $0.08 shown on the console.
    It is recommended to automatically and regularly synchronize the latest official pricing adjustments of DeepSeek to ensure accurate billing settlement.

  11. HongkaiSong commented on May 25, 2026

    @HongkaiSong

    +1

  12. arpankanwer commented on May 25, 2026

    @arpankanwer

    +1

  13. 79 remaining items

  14. openclawcommits commented on Jun 21, 2026

    @openclawcommits

    DeepSeek model by DeepSeek provider is cheap because they train on your data. In contrast, OpenCode Go explicitly guarantees they won't train on your data. This is also why DeepSeek is more expensive on other third-party providers on OpenRouter.

    my data is useless

  15. WhiteGiverMa commented on Jun 23, 2026

    @WhiteGiverMa

    Sincerely, not only engineers does OpenCode need, but somebody like "customer services". Maybe somebody eloquent in your team can do it. Or it will cause disaster, not a joke. I 've been an OpenCode fan for a long time and am very afraid of that day... @thdxr

  16. WhiteGiverMa commented on Jun 23, 2026

    @WhiteGiverMa

    Sincerely, not only engineers does OpenCode need, but some customer services. Maybe somebody eloquent in your team can do it. Or it will cause disaster, not a joke. I 'm an OpenCode fan for a long time and am very afraid of that day... @thdxr

    Needs somebody to communicates with the community, response timely, friendly and clearly, I mean. I know Anomaly is not a so large team

  17. ignoramous commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @ignoramous

    Most US-based providers like CoreWeave.com/WandB.ai, Fireworks.ai, Together.ai, Baseten.co seem to have the same (non-discounted) rate for DeepSeek v4 Pro as billed by OpenCode Go. Though Anomaly has not disclosed the providers they use, it is likely their pricing is simply a reflection of their provider's.

  18. hamb1y commented on Jun 27, 2026

    @hamb1y

    Would it be possible to give us a special, specially marked as "insecure" maybe option to use deepseek v4 pro or flash through the official deepseek api, at the canonical deepseek v4 api cost?

  19. punkboat commented on Jun 27, 2026

    @punkboat

    Would it be possible to give us a special, specially marked as "insecure" maybe option to use deepseek v4 pro or flash through the official deepseek api, at the canonical deepseek v4 api cost?

    OpenCode Go already goes through the official DeepSeek API.

  20. hamb1y commented on Jun 27, 2026

    @hamb1y

    Would it be possible to give us a special, specially marked as "insecure" maybe option to use deepseek v4 pro or flash through the official deepseek api, at the canonical deepseek v4 api cost?

    OpenCode Go already goes through the official DeepSeek API.

    oh, then why dont we get the permanent discount? feels kinda scummy tbh

  21. danieliyahu1 commented on Jul 2, 2026

    @danieliyahu1

    Anyone has update regarding that? I wonder if I should use opencode go or use deepseek api directly

  22. hamb1y commented on Jul 2, 2026

    @hamb1y

    Anyone has update regarding that? I wonder if I should use opencode go or use deepseek api directly

    no clue xd

  23. hamb1y commented on Jul 2, 2026

    @hamb1y

    prob should just use api for deepseek for now

  24. dynodevv commented on Jul 6, 2026

    @dynodevv

    Would it be possible to give us a special, specially marked as "insecure" maybe option to use deepseek v4 pro or flash through the official deepseek api, at the canonical deepseek v4 api cost?

    OpenCode Go already goes through the official DeepSeek API.

    oh, then why dont we get the permanent discount? feels kinda scummy tbh

    #28846 (comment)

    OC Go also has ZDR, DeepSeek API does not

  25. dynodevv commented on Jul 6, 2026

    @dynodevv

    Most US-based providers like CoreWeave.com/WandB.ai, Fireworks.ai, Together.ai, Baseten.co seem to have the same (non-discounted) rate for DeepSeek v4 Pro as billed by OpenCode Go. Though Anomaly has not disclosed the providers they use, it is likely their pricing is simply a reflection of their provider's.

    Image
  26. jinyu2022 commented on Jul 11, 2026

    @jinyu2022

    Because OpenCode has signed a ZDR agreement with DeepSeek, the price of the DeepSeek V4 Pro model remains relatively high.
    
    That sounds plausible, but isn’t that just your speculation? Is there any official statement confirming this?
    
    Also, CommandCode also supports ZDR and is powered by DeepSeek, yet their model pricing is 75% off.

    Sorry, I only just saw the official reply. Well, I hope DeepSeek V4.1 can come with a more favorable price.

  27. dynodevv commented on Jul 26, 2026

    @dynodevv

    Seems like Go uses the discounted price now 🎉

    Image
  28. ignoramous commented on Jul 26, 2026

    @ignoramous

    Not for Zen.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions