Top 5 AI Inference and Model Hosting Platforms (2026): Together AI vs Fireworks AI vs Replicate vs Groq vs Baseten
Serverless APIs for running open-weight models like Llama and Mistral, or your own fine-tuned checkpoint, in production without owning GPUs. Real per-token and per-second pricing, cold-start behavior, and fine-tuning support compared.
Quick Comparison
| Platform | Best For | Starting Price | Custom Fine-Tune Hosting | Notable Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fireworks AI | Hosting custom fine-tunes at base-model cost via Multi-LoRA | $0.10/M tokens (under 4B params) | Yes, self-serve Multi-LoRA | FireAttention kernels, 50% off cached/batch tokens |
| Together AI | Broadest open-weight catalog with fine-tuning built in | $0.18/M tokens (Llama 3.1 8B) | Yes, dedicated endpoints | 68+ models, fine-tune-to-endpoint pipeline |
| Groq | Fastest, cheapest raw token generation on supported models | $0.05/M input tokens (Llama 3.1 8B) | Enterprise-only, request-based LoRA | 500+ tokens/sec on custom LPU hardware |
| Replicate | Trying the widest catalog of open-source models pay-per-use | $0.000225/sec (T4 GPU) | Yes, but cold starts are billed | Thousands of community models, one API |
| Baseten | Custom model deployments needing infrastructure-level control | $0.01052/min (T4 GPU) | Yes, via Truss deployment config | Full control over serving pipeline |
Fireworks AI
- Best For
- Hosting custom fine-tunes at base-model cost via Multi-LoRA
- Starting Price
- $0.10/M tokens (under 4B params)
- Custom Fine-Tune Hosting
- Yes, self-serve Multi-LoRA
- Notable Strength
- FireAttention kernels, 50% off cached/batch tokens
Together AI
- Best For
- Broadest open-weight catalog with fine-tuning built in
- Starting Price
- $0.18/M tokens (Llama 3.1 8B)
- Custom Fine-Tune Hosting
- Yes, dedicated endpoints
- Notable Strength
- 68+ models, fine-tune-to-endpoint pipeline
Groq
- Best For
- Fastest, cheapest raw token generation on supported models
- Starting Price
- $0.05/M input tokens (Llama 3.1 8B)
- Custom Fine-Tune Hosting
- Enterprise-only, request-based LoRA
- Notable Strength
- 500+ tokens/sec on custom LPU hardware
Replicate
- Best For
- Trying the widest catalog of open-source models pay-per-use
- Starting Price
- $0.000225/sec (T4 GPU)
- Custom Fine-Tune Hosting
- Yes, but cold starts are billed
- Notable Strength
- Thousands of community models, one API
Baseten
- Best For
- Custom model deployments needing infrastructure-level control
- Starting Price
- $0.01052/min (T4 GPU)
- Custom Fine-Tune Hosting
- Yes, via Truss deployment config
- Notable Strength
- Full control over serving pipeline
Fireworks AI
Best OverallBest for: Hosting custom fine-tuned models cheaply alongside open-weight inference via Multi-LoRA
“Fireworks AI is the strongest overall pick for teams running open-weight models in production because Multi-LoRA serving solves the exact problem this category exists for: hosting a custom fine-tuned model without paying for a dedicated GPU per tenant. FireAttention's custom kernels and 50% discounts on cached and batch tokens make the per-token economics competitive at real scale. It is not the cheapest raw token price on the market and the Priority tier for guaranteed throughput costs extra, but for a team that needs both open-weight inference and custom fine-tunes served from one account, this is the platform to start with.”
Pros
- FireAttention custom CUDA kernels are built to outperform stock vLLM/TensorRT-LLM throughput on the same hardware, which matters when GPU-seconds are the cost driver
- Multi-LoRA serving hosts hundreds of fine-tuned adapters on one shared base-model deployment at the same per-token price as the base model, so a custom fine-tune does not require its own GPU
- Tiered pricing by parameter count ($0.10/M under 4B, $0.20/M for 4B-16B, up to $0.90/M for dense models over 16B) is transparent and predictable compared to per-model negotiated rates
- Cached input tokens are billed at 50% off and batch inference at 50% off standard serverless rates, both real levers for RAG and offline pipelines
- Dynamic loading of LoRA adapters means a new fine-tune can go live within seconds, not a redeploy cycle
Cons
- The Priority tier for guaranteed throughput and lower queue time costs roughly 1.25 to 1.5x the standard token rate, so the advertised price and the price under load diverge
- On-demand dedicated GPU rental ($7/hour for H100/H200, up to $12/hour for B300) is priced above several raw GPU-cloud competitors for teams that do not need the inference-stack tooling
- MoE models up to 176B are billed flat at $1.20/MTok regardless of active-parameter count, which can overcharge relative to a dense-equivalent alternative
Multi-LoRA and Fine-Tuning
Fireworks supports full fine-tuning, LoRA, reinforcement learning, and quantization-aware training, but Multi-LoRA is the feature that changes the economics of this category. Instead of paying for a dedicated GPU per fine-tuned model, Multi-LoRA serves hundreds of LoRA adapters on a single base-model deployment through cross-model continuous batching, so a customer-specific fine-tune costs the same per token as the shared base model. Dynamic loading and caching mean adapters can be added or removed within seconds rather than requiring a redeploy. For a team that fine-tunes per customer or per use case, this turns an otherwise expensive GPU-per-tenant problem into a shared-infrastructure one.
FireAttention and Pricing Mechanics
FireAttention is Fireworks' custom CUDA attention kernel, built to outperform standard implementations like vLLM on the same hardware. The company also offers a Priority tier for teams that need guaranteed throughput and lower queue time under load, at roughly 1.25 to 1.5 times the standard token price. Combined with 50% discounts on cached input tokens and batch inference, the platform gives production teams several concrete levers to control cost instead of a single flat rate that only moves one direction.
Serverless from $0.10/M tokens (under 4B params) to $0.90/M tokens (dense models over 16B); Multi-LoRA fine-tunes serve at base-model token price; cached tokens 50% off, batch inference 50% off; on-demand H100/H200 from $7/hour
Together AI
Best ValueBest for: Broadest open-weight model catalog with fine-tuning-to-hosting in one product
“Together AI is the best value pick for a team that wants one platform for fine-tuning and hosting without committing to a narrower, faster niche player. The model catalog is the widest of the five and small-model token pricing is hard to beat. The honest catch is dedicated-endpoint capacity: Together can run out of spare GPU inventory for your exact model and region, and the endpoint queues rather than provisioning instantly, so teams with a hard launch deadline should provision ahead of time, not the week of.”
Pros
- Broadest open-weight model catalog among the five, with 68+ models available serverless including Llama, Qwen, Gemma, and Mistral Nemo variants
- Cheapest small-model entry point in this comparison outside Groq: Llama 3.1 8B at $0.18/M input+output tokens
- Fine-tuning through to dedicated-endpoint deployment is one continuous product line, with an optional 99.9% uptime SLA on dedicated endpoints
- Dedicated H100 endpoints starting at $2.99/hour undercut several direct GPU-cloud rentals for equivalent hardware
Cons
- Dedicated endpoint provisioning is capacity-constrained: Together's own documentation states that if requested replica count exceeds available capacity, the endpoint queues instead of spinning up on demand
- Serverless tier has documented cold starts and rate limits that surface under bursty production traffic, not just on the first request
- No custom Docker images or persistent storage on standard plans, which rules out workloads needing a nonstandard inference stack alongside the model
Fine-Tuning to Dedicated Endpoints
Together AI's fine-tuning product now covers tool calling, reasoning, and vision fine-tunes, and a fine-tuned model can be pushed straight to a dedicated endpoint with an optional 99.9% uptime SLA. Dedicated H100 endpoints start at $2.99/hour, and fine-tuning itself starts at $0.48 per million tokens processed. The pipeline from fine-tune to production endpoint is one continuous workflow rather than an export-and-redeploy-elsewhere step, which is the platform's main structural advantage over piecing together separate fine-tuning and hosting vendors.
Capacity and Reliability Reality
Together's own dedicated-endpoints documentation acknowledges that available GPU capacity is finite: if a customer requests a minimum replica count higher than what is currently free, the endpoint queues until capacity opens up rather than provisioning instantly. Public reviews also surface recurring complaints about unexpected charges and slow support responses. None of this makes Together unusable, but it means teams should treat dedicated-endpoint provisioning as a lead-time item, not an on-demand button, especially around high-traffic launches.
Serverless from $0.18/M tokens (Llama 3.1 8B) to $0.88/M tokens (Llama 3.3 70B); dedicated H100 endpoints from $2.99/hour; fine-tuning from $0.48/M tokens processed
Groq
FastestBest for: Lowest-latency, cheapest-per-token inference on supported open-weight models
“Groq is the fastest inference API by a wide margin for the specific open-weight models it supports, at the lowest published token price of the five. It is the right pick when raw tokens-per-second is the product requirement: live voice agents, interactive coding assistants, anything with a tight latency budget. It is the wrong pick if your workload centers on a custom fine-tuned model, because that path requires Enterprise-tier approval, not a self-serve upload, so most teams should host the fine-tune elsewhere and reserve Groq for the base-model, latency-critical parts of the pipeline.”
Pros
- Custom LPU hardware delivers 500 or more tokens per second on supported models, the fastest published raw decode speed among serverless inference APIs
- Cheapest token pricing in this comparison: Llama 3.1 8B Instant at $0.05/M input tokens, $0.08/M output tokens
- Llama 3.3 70B Versatile at $0.59/$0.79 per M input/output tokens undercuts equivalent-tier pricing from Together and Fireworks
- NVIDIA's non-exclusive licensing deal for Groq's inference technology, reported at roughly $20B in December 2025, signals the hardware approach has commercial staying power
Cons
- Standard self-serve accounts cannot upload or run a custom fine-tuned model; LoRA hosting exists but is gated behind Enterprise-tier approval, not an API call
- Model catalog is limited to a curated set of open-weight models (Llama, Mixtral, Gemma, Kimi K2, and similar); there is no path to run an arbitrary architecture
- The speed advantage is specific to the decode phase; workloads bottlenecked on prompt processing or large-batch throughput see a smaller gap versus GPU-based competitors
LPU Hardware and Speed
Groq's Language Processing Unit is purpose-built for the decode phase of autoregressive generation, the token-by-token step that GPUs handle less efficiently than prompt processing. That focus produces 500 or more tokens per second on supported models, fast enough that NVIDIA structured a non-exclusive licensing deal for the underlying inference technology in December 2025, reportedly worth around $20 billion. For latency-bound products, voice agents, live coding assistants, real-time chat, that speed is a genuine product differentiator, not a marketing number.
The Custom Model Gap
Groq's core limitation for this category is model flexibility. The catalog is a curated set of open-weight models the company has optimized for its hardware; there is no self-serve path to upload an arbitrary custom fine-tune. LoRA fine-tune hosting was added in 2026, but it ships gated behind Enterprise-tier approval and a request process, not an API endpoint a solo developer can hit. Teams building on a custom fine-tune should plan to host that model on Fireworks, Together, or Baseten and reserve Groq for the parts of their stack running an unmodified supported model.
$0.05/M input tokens, $0.08/M output tokens for Llama 3.1 8B Instant; $0.59/$0.79 per M input/output tokens for Llama 3.3 70B Versatile; up to $1.00/$3.00 per M for larger models like Kimi K2; LoRA fine-tune hosting is Enterprise-only, request-based
Replicate
Best Open SourceBest for: Trying and shipping the widest catalog of community open-source models pay-per-use
“Replicate is the best open-source pick for teams that want to try or ship dozens of different community models without committing to one vendor's curated catalog, and its pay-per-use model with free cold starts on public models is genuinely friendly to low-volume or spiky use. The trade-off shows up the moment you deploy your own custom model privately: cold starts stop being free and start being billed as GPU time, which can make a short inference job cost roughly ten times its raw compute price. Teams running a single custom fine-tune at consistent volume will usually get more predictable economics from Fireworks or Together.”
Pros
- Largest catalog of ready-to-call community and open-source models, spanning text, image, audio, and video, the widest "just try a model" surface area of the five
- Per-second billing on public models charges only for active compute time; cold starts on public models are not billed to the caller
- Popular models like FLUX are available at flat per-image pricing ($0.003 to $0.04/image) instead of requiring GPU-second math
- Acquired by Cloudflare in 2026, giving it distribution and infrastructure backing beyond a standalone startup's balance sheet
Cons
- Private and custom model deployments bill for the entire online window, setup, idle, and active inference, not just processing time, so a slow cold start directly inflates the bill
- A roughly two-minute cold start on a private H100 deployment ahead of a 20-second inference can push the effective cost to about ten times the raw compute time
- Per-second GPU pricing (T4 at $0.000225/sec up to H100 at $0.001525/sec) requires modeling both request volume and cold-start frequency to predict a real bill, unlike flat per-token pricing
Model Catalog and Pay-Per-Use
Replicate's core product is a marketplace-style catalog of thousands of community-published and official models spanning text, image, audio, and video generation, callable through a single consistent API. Public models bill only for active processing time on a per-second basis, and cold starts on those public models are not charged to the caller, which makes Replicate genuinely cheap for low-volume or exploratory use. Popular models like FLUX skip GPU-second billing entirely in favor of a flat per-image price, simplifying cost forecasting for image workloads specifically.
The Private Deployment Cold-Start Trap
The billing model changes once a team deploys its own custom or private model instead of calling a public one. Private deployments are billed for the entire time the instance is online, including boot and idle time, not just active inference. A cold start on a private H100 deployment can take around two minutes, and if a request only needs 20 seconds of actual inference, the effective cost of that request is roughly ten times higher than the raw compute time suggests. Cloudflare's 2026 acquisition of Replicate has not changed this mechanic; teams running custom models at real traffic volume need to plan around it or keep instances warm.
Per-second GPU billing: $0.000115/sec (CPU) to $0.000225/sec (T4) to $0.001400/sec (A100 80GB) to $0.001525/sec (H100); popular models like FLUX billed flat per-image ($0.003 to $0.04); public model cold starts are free, private deployment cold starts are billed as GPU time
Baseten
Best for EnterpriseBest for: Custom model deployments needing infrastructure-level control
“Baseten is the best enterprise pick for teams that need to deploy a genuinely custom model, a nonstandard architecture, a multi-step pipeline, or specific hardware pinning, and are willing to own the deployment config in exchange for that control. The Truss abstraction and per-minute billing with scale-to-zero are well-suited to production ML teams with a platform engineer on staff. It is the wrong tool for a developer who wants to call a hosted Llama endpoint in an afternoon; that job is faster and cheaper on Fireworks, Together, or Groq.”
Pros
- Truss deployment abstraction gives real control over custom model serving: define load() and predict() plus hardware config directly, not limited to a vendor's pre-selected model list
- Per-minute dedicated GPU billing (T4 at $0.01052/min up to B200 at $0.16633/min) with scale-to-zero on idle keeps costs bounded for spiky but not constant workloads
- The Baseten Delivery Network cuts cold starts roughly 2 to 3x versus the platform's prior baseline for large model containers, a real fix to a real problem the vendor previously had
- Popular open models are also available serverless per-million-tokens, so teams are not forced into custom deployment for standard workloads
Cons
- Large model containers can still take 30 to 90 seconds to cold-start on first request after scale-down, even with Delivery Network improvements
- No middle ground between accepting cold-start variance and paying to keep replicas warm; teams with latency-sensitive APIs end up paying for idle capacity anyway
- Truss-based custom deployment requires real ML infrastructure work, autoscaling parameters, container config, that a plain chat-completions API call does not, raising the skill floor versus Fireworks or Together for a standard open-weight model
Truss and Custom Deployment Control
Baseten's deployment model centers on Truss, a Python-based abstraction where a model is defined by load() and predict() methods plus a config.yaml describing hardware and dependencies. That gives teams real control: any model architecture, any custom pre- or post-processing pipeline, pinned to specific GPU hardware, not limited to a vendor's pre-selected catalog. The trade-off is that autoscaling parameters and deployment configuration require actual ML infrastructure knowledge, closer to running your own inference service than calling a hosted API.
Cold Starts and Pricing
Large model containers can take 30 to 90 seconds to cold-start on first request after scaling to zero, a real latency cost for spiky traffic. The Baseten Delivery Network, introduced to address this, cuts cold-start time by roughly 2 to 3x for big models, but does not eliminate the trade-off between paying for idle warm replicas and accepting cold-start variance. Pricing is per-minute on dedicated GPU instances, from $0.01052/min on a T4 up to $0.16633/min on a B200, with popular open models also available serverless per-million-tokens for teams that do not need custom deployment.
Dedicated GPU billed per minute: $0.01052/min (T4) to $0.01414/min (L4) to $0.06667/min (A100 80GB) to $0.16633/min (B200 180GB); pay-as-you-go on-demand from $0.63/hour (T4) to $9.98/hour (B200); popular open models also available serverless per-million-tokens
Which One Should You Pick?
| Use Case | Our Recommendation |
|---|---|
| I need to run Llama or Mistral inference behind a product feature with no GPU ops, and might fine-tune later | Fireworks AI. Multi-LoRA means a later fine-tune slots into the same serverless deployment at base-model token pricing instead of forcing a migration to dedicated GPUs. |
| I already fine-tuned a model on my own data and need to serve it in production cheaply | Fireworks AI for LoRA-scale customizations (same cost as the base model), or Together AI if the fine-tune needs a dedicated endpoint with an uptime SLA. Groq is not an option here on a standard account. |
| My product needs sub-second, high-throughput token generation for a live voice agent or coding assistant | Groq. 500+ tokens/second on LPU hardware and the lowest published token price beat every GPU-based competitor on raw decode speed, as long as the model you need is in Groq's supported catalog. |
| I want to prototype with dozens of different open-source image, audio, or video models before picking one | Replicate. The catalog breadth and free cold starts on public models make it the cheapest way to experiment across many models before committing to a production vendor. |
| I need a nonstandard model architecture, a multi-step inference pipeline, or specific hardware pinning with full infra control | Baseten. Truss gives direct control over the serving code and hardware that a plain hosted-model API cannot express, at the cost of owning the deployment configuration. |
How we evaluated
AI inference and model hosting platforms let a team run open-weight models like Llama and Mistral, or their own fine-tuned checkpoint, in production behind an API instead of provisioning and managing GPUs. This comparison weighs which platforms actually hold up under real production conditions: cold starts, GPU capacity limits, and custom fine-tune support, not which ones have the most polished pricing page.
Each platform was assessed on the criteria that decide real outcomes, the same dimensions you see in the comparison table above:
- Best fit: the workload each platform actually solves well, running a stock open-weight model, serving a custom fine-tune, or squeezing out maximum tokens-per-second, not the workload its homepage leads with.
- Fine-tune support: whether a custom or fine-tuned model can be uploaded and served self-serve, gated behind an enterprise tier, or not supported at all.
- Cold start and latency behavior: what actually happens on a scale-from-zero request, whether it's billed, and how long it takes, since this is where advertised pricing and real invoices diverge.
- Capacity reality: whether dedicated or private GPU capacity provisions on demand or queues behind other customers when supply is tight.
- Pricing model: per-token, per-second, or per-GPU-minute, and how it actually adds up once cold starts, private deployments, and priority tiers enter the picture.
What we reviewed
This comparison draws on official documentation and publicly posted pricing from each vendor, published benchmark and pricing analyses current as of August 2026, and vendor engineering blog posts describing their own infrastructure trade-offs (cold-start behavior, LoRA serving mechanics, GPU capacity constraints). It reflects the market as of 2026 and is refreshed as platforms ship and reprice.
Editorial independence: this is a vendor-neutral comparison with no paid placements, sponsorships, or affiliate links. Rankings reflect fit for the stated use cases, not commercial relationships.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which platform is cheapest for running Llama models in production?
Can I host my own fine-tuned model on Groq?
What's the real cost difference between Replicate's per-second billing and per-token pricing elsewhere?
Which platform is best for hosting many customer-specific fine-tuned models cheaply?
Is Baseten worth it if I just want to call a hosted open-weight model API?
How reliable are dedicated GPU endpoints on Together AI?
Related Comparisons
AI Legal / Contract
Top 5 AI Legal and Contract Tools 2026: Harvey vs Spellbook vs Ironclad vs LegalOn vs Luminance
5 tools compared
AI Sales / SDR
Top 5 AI Sales / SDR Tools in 2026
5 tools compared
AI Video Editing
Top 5 AI Video Editing and Repurposing Tools of 2026: Descript vs Opus Clip vs the Rest
5 tools compared
RAG Platform
Top 5 RAG-as-a-Service Platforms 2026: Vectara vs LlamaCloud vs Ragie vs Pinecone Assistant vs Vertex AI Search
5 tools compared