Both paths use the same OpenAI-compatible API, so this is not a lock-in decision — it is a convenience-and-cost one. Here is when going through a gateway actually pays off, and when direct is fine.
The hidden cost of “just go direct”
- A separate account, key, and invoice for each provider.
- You write your own fallback when a model is down — or your app errors out.
- No shared cache, so identical requests are paid for every time.
- Adding a new model means a new integration, not a one-line change.
Side by side
Keys
Direct: one per provider. TDSPRO: a single key for all.
Fallback
Direct: you build it. TDSPRO: automatic, in milliseconds.
Caching
Direct: none by default. TDSPRO: repeats cost less.
Billing
Direct: many invoices. TDSPRO: one bill, one dashboard.
Routing
Direct: wire each model. TDSPRO: call an alias.
New models
Direct: new account. TDSPRO: already there — just call it.
When TDSPRO clearly wins
- You use (or want to try) more than one model or provider.
- Uptime matters — you cannot afford a single provider’s bad day.
- You have repeat traffic that caching can cheapen.
- You want one dashboard for budgets, limits, and usage.
When direct is perfectly fine
If you call exactly one model, have no uptime requirements, and never repeat requests, a single direct integration is simple enough. The moment you add a second model or care about reliability, a gateway starts paying for itself.
Honesty note: TDSPRO never swaps your model for a cheaper one. Savings come only from caching identical requests — same model, same answer, fewer paid calls.
Try it on the free tier
See the difference yourself — one key, automatic fallback, and caching. Start free, upgrade only if you need to.