---
title: "Comment by Kartik N V J K on \"Agentic RAG costs 2.5x classic RAG: the 2026 routing decision\" | Hashnode"
description: "Reframing classic versus agentic as a per-query routing decision rather than a global architecture choice is the right move, and a classifier at 93.2% accuracy"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/agentic-rag-costs-25x-classic-rag-the-2026-routing-decision/6a685a348947a3237f8a9d34/comment/6a68fec92a87ab09072ef1e5"
---

[Discussion](https://hashnode.com/posts/agentic-rag-costs-25x-classic-rag-the-2026-routing-decision/6a685a348947a3237f8a9d34)

Comment [Agentic RAG costs 2.5x classic RAG: the 2026 routing decision](https://hashnode.com/posts/agentic-rag-costs-25x-classic-rag-the-2026-routing-decision/6a685a348947a3237f8a9d34)

[Kartik N V J K](https://hashnode.com/@kartik-nvj)

[Jul 28](https://hashnode.com/posts/agentic-rag-costs-25x-classic-rag-the-2026-routing-decision/6a685a348947a3237f8a9d34/comment/6a68fec92a87ab09072ef1e5)

Reframing classic versus agentic as a per-query routing decision rather than a global architecture choice is the right move, and a classifier at 93.2% accuracy cutting 28.1% of tokens is a convincing enough number to act on. The part I would stress-test is the asymmetry of the routing errors, since sending a genuinely multi-hop query down the cheap single-pass path costs you a correct answer, while the reverse only costs tokens. Did the RAGRouter-Bench numbers report routing accuracy per query type, because the tail of hard queries is where that 6.8% miss rate actually bites?