Skip to content

docs: reflect real-world hub cost estimate ranges #2285

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
Michael Flanakin (flanakin) wants to merge 5 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from
+5 −4
Open

docs: reflect real-world hub cost estimate ranges #2285

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3081846
docs: reflect real-world hub cost estimate ranges
flanakin Aug 26, 2026
a0cad67
chore: Update ms.date in docs-mslearn files
github-actions[bot] Aug 26, 2026
9b5783e
docs: add changelog entry for hub cost estimate update
flanakin Sep 1, 2026
a7f2fd1
Merge remote-tracking branch into flanakin/2229-hub-cost-estimate-docs
flanakin Sep 1, 2026
b4e679e
chore: Update ms.date in docs-mslearn files
github-actions[bot] Sep 1, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions docs-mslearn/toolkit/hubs/finops-hubs-overview.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -25,9 +25,9 @@ FinOps hubs extend Cost Management to provide a scalable platform for advanced d

<!-- prettier-ignore-start -->
> [!NOTE]
> Estimated cost: Starts at $120/mo + $10/mo per $1M in cost being monitored.
> Estimated cost: Starts at $160/mo + $10/mo per $1M in cost being monitored.

@RolandKrummenacher Roland Krummenacher (RolandKrummenacher) Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the per-$1M figure is being revised (see the note on line 30 — the body now says $15 without Data Explorer while this line and the next still say $10), this headline needs to move in step. Right now a reader gets $10 here, $10 in the first half of the note, and $15 in the second half.

>
> Estimated monthly cost includes $120 for a single-node Azure Data Explorer cluster or $300 for F2 Fabric capacity, plus $10 in Azure storage and processing cost per $1M being monitored. Exact cost will vary based on discounts, data size (we estimate ~20GB per $1M), and Fabric or Power BI license requirements. Cost without Data Explorer or Fabric is $5 per $1M. For details, refer to the [FinOps hub cost estimate](https://aka.ms/finops/hubs/calculator) in the Azure Pricing Calculator.
> Estimated monthly cost includes $160+ for a single-node Azure Data Explorer cluster or $310 for F2 Fabric capacity, plus $10 in Azure storage and processing cost per $1M being monitored. Exact cost will vary based on discounts, region, data size, and Fabric or Power BI license requirements. Cost without Data Explorer or Fabric is $15 per $1M. For details, refer to the [FinOps hub cost estimate](https://aka.ms/finops/hubs/calculator) in the Azure Pricing Calculator.

@RolandKrummenacher Roland Krummenacher (RolandKrummenacher) Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These two numbers can't both be right:

...plus $10 in Azure storage and processing cost per $1M being monitored. ... Cost without Data Explorer or Fabric is $15 per $1M.

The old pairing ($10 with Data Explorer, $5 without) was coherent — drop ADX, drop the ingestion-side cost. The new pairing has the no-ADX deployment costing more per $1M than the ADX deployment's incremental, which inverts that. One of the two has been updated and the other hasn't.

If $15 is the corrected storage + Data Factory figure, then the $10 here and in the headline on line 28 both need to move with it. Worth double-checking the number itself too — it's a 3-5x jump from the ~$3-5 per $1M quoted in help-me-choose.md:52.

Nit: dropping "(we estimate ~20GB per $1M)" removes the only handle a reader has for sanity-checking against their own data volume. Could it stay alongside the new "region" caveat rather than being swapped out for it?

<!-- prettier-ignore-end -->

<br>
Expand Down