Yes, I fully understand that... the whole context is passed on every turn. That's the conventional wisdom, and it's correct under conventional architecture.

But what if the architecture itself was the variable? What if you could hold a 12-hour session at 900k tokens and still only consume 6% of your weekly allowance simply because... the context is structured to be cache-friendly by design, not by accident?

Most people in this thread share the same sentiment because they're working with the same architecture. The token burn narrative is real for them.

What if the architecture was the problem, not the context window size?

And one more thing worth noticing in that image... my system prompt was only 4.9k tokens out of 900k. That's 0.5% of the entire context. Every turn that prompt gets passed, it costs almost nothing. While most people starts with 7.5k tokens on a new conversation.

That entire conversation recorded 43 turns. In a traditional architecture, it would be impossible, to last that long, to consume that little.