Skip to main content

FinOps for AI & AI for FinOps are knocking on our doors

 In recent years, many organisations have focused on GenAI pilots to demonstrate feasibility, with 2024 and 2025 centered on testing possibilities. By 2026, the main argument is clear: leaders must shift their emphasis from experimentation to delivering measurable ROI, strong unit economics, and predictable costs. AI's future depends on moving from innovation initiatives to products that drive sustainable margins.

The FinOps Foundation notes that AI and ML growth is accelerating, introducing higher-cost resources and new spending models such as tokens, GPUs, and managed AI services. FinOps is key to managing these costs. The Foundation cites Gartner’s $644B GenAI spending estimate in 2025 and IDC’s projection that by 2027, 75% of organisations will integrate GenAI with FinOps processes.
AI challenges traditional cloud cost models. While classic applications focus on CPU, memory, and traffic, GenAI introduces new cost drivers, including token usage, retrieval latency, vector search, GPU time for fine-tuning, and hidden data costs across pipelines and storage. Token pricing can be particularly unexpected, as organisations pay for both input and output, with costs rising rapidly as usage grows.
For this reason, FinOps for AI is becoming essential. The FinOps for AI working group provides practical guidance on scope, forecasting, optimisation, and unit economics, and encourages a value-driven approach that links AI spending to outcomes and business value rather than just cost savings (https://www.finops.org/wg/unlocking-ai-business-value-with-finops)
AI will also enhance FinOps. We will see more 'AI for FinOps' solutions, such as agents that answer cost questions, detect anomalies, recommend actions, and automate guardrails. The Foundation already provides examples, including routing queries to cost-effective models, prompt compression, token estimation, and anomaly detection to reduce waste.


Microsoft Foundry is adding model routing and transparent token pricing for various models. Microsoft’s Foundry blog details token pricing per million tokens, showing that a 'mini' model can cost much less than the full model for input and output.
A customer support assistant using 10 million input and output tokens per month incurs high costs if all traffic goes to the most expensive model. Routing 70% of requests to a smaller model and 30% to the full model can reduce token costs by over 50% without compromising quality for most interactions. This shows FinOps’ practical value in managing cost-to-serve per chat, case, or segment.
The data aspect is also key. GenAI needs strong data foundations and analytics. Microsoft Foundry, for example, helps teams monitor and manage consumption by exposing costs as capacity units, with pooling and dashboards. In 2026, CFOs will ask, “How much does this AI feature cost per transaction?” The answer will include tokens, GPU time, and Foundry capacity supporting the system.
In 2026, AI success will be measured not only by impressive demonstrations but by unit economics and business value. Teams that adopt FinOps for AI early will scale AI with confidence, driving tangible business outcomes and setting a new standard for operational excellence.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...