AkashML vs CoreWeave: LLM provider comparison

At a glance

Metric winners

There is no overall score. Each winner answers one specific question using only directly comparable data.

Fastest on shared models

CCoreWeave

1.55× typical advantage

5 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

AAkashML

$0.5048 / 1M

5 exact models using a 1K-input/500-output mix

Most models available

CCoreWeave

20 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

Metric	AAkashML☆☆☆☆☆(0)	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)
Speed	AkashML19.23 s	CoreWeave17.27 s
TTFT	AkashML0.84 s	CoreWeave0.35 s
TPS	AkashML31.0 tok/s	CoreWeave30.0 tok/s
Uptime	AkashML99.70%	CoreWeave100.00%
Blended	AkashML$0.5048 / 1M	CoreWeave$0.8913 / 1M

Model	AAkashML☆☆☆☆☆(0)	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)
ZA GLM 5.2Winner · AkashML	AkashML Speed— Best comparable value 20.02 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 3.90 s TPS— Best comparable value 31.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 98.98% Context 96.9K Route akashml/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $1.32 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 20.46 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.94 s TPS— Worst comparable value 27.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 99.96% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended— Worst comparable value $2.3933 / 1M
Q Qwen3.6 35B A3BWinner · CoreWeave	AkashML Speed— Worst comparable value 6.72 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.55 s TPS— Worst comparable value 81.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.99% Context 262.1K Route akashml/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.4267 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 3.72 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.26 s TPS— Best comparable value 144.5 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.5833 / 1M
D DeepSeek V4 FlashWinner · CoreWeave	AkashML Speed— Worst comparable value 40.08 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.61 s TPS— Worst comparable value 13.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.70% Context 131.1K Route akashml/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.1307 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 17.27 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.60 s TPS— Best comparable value 30.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 99.85% Context 1M Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.1867 / 1M
Q Qwen3.5-35B-A3BWinner · CoreWeave	AkashML Speed— Worst comparable value 7.51 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.84 s TPS— Worst comparable value 75.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route akashml/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.4267 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.86 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.35 s TPS— Best comparable value 111.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.5833 / 1M
ML Llama 3.3 70B InstructWinner · AkashML	AkashML Speed— Worst comparable value 19.23 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.71 s TPS— Worst comparable value 27.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 98.51% Context 131.1K Route akashml/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.22 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 18.01 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.15 s TPS— Best comparable value 28.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 128K Route coreweave/fp16 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.71 / 1M

A per-model winner combines blended price and estimated 500-token response time with equal proportional weight. Ties and rows missing either measurement receive no badge. Comparison data calculated Jul 24, 2026, 6:19 PM UTC. Values use one deterministic route per provider and model; missing measurements remain visible as N/a.