AtlasCloud 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

1.29× typical advantage

10 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

AAtlasCloud

$1.3045 / 1M

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

Most models available

AAtlasCloud

32 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

Metric	AAtlasCloud☆☆☆☆☆(0)	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)
Speed	AtlasCloud12.41 s	CoreWeave6.95 s
TTFT	AtlasCloud1.37 s	CoreWeave0.44 s
TPS	AtlasCloud44.5 tok/s	CoreWeave78.0 tok/s
Uptime	AtlasCloud99.63%	CoreWeave100.00%
Blended	AtlasCloud$1.3045 / 1M	CoreWeave$1.391 / 1M

Model	AAtlasCloud☆☆☆☆☆(0)	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)
ZA GLM 5.2Winner · AtlasCloud	AtlasCloud Speed— Best comparable value 19.85 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 3.19 s TPS— Best comparable value 30.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.33% Context 1M Route atlas-cloud/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $2.16 / 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
M Kimi K2.7 CodeWinner · CoreWeave	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 9.52 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.59 s TPS— Worst comparable value 63.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route atlas-cloud/int4 Blended— Worst comparable value $1.9667 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 7.35 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.68 s TPS— Best comparable value 75.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/int4 Blended— Best comparable value $1.96 / 1M
Q Qwen3.6 35B A3BWinner · CoreWeave	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 4.67 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.82 s TPS— Worst comparable value 130.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.80% Context 262.1K Route atlas-cloud/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.4952 / 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 ProWinner · AtlasCloud	AtlasCloud Speed— Best comparable value 13.63 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 2.27 s TPS— Best comparable value 44.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 97.55% Context 1M Route atlas-cloud/fp4 Blended— Best comparable value $2.2467 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 64.00 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.50 s TPS— Worst comparable value 8.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 98.59% Context 1M Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $2.32 / 1M
D DeepSeek V4 FlashWinner · AtlasCloud	AtlasCloud Speed— Best comparable value 9.19 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.26 s TPS— Best comparable value 63.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 99.86% Context 1M Route atlas-cloud/fp4 Blended $0.1867 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 17.27 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.60 s TPS— Worst comparable value 30.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.85% Context 1M Route coreweave/fp8 Blended $0.1867 / 1M
M Kimi K2.6Winner · CoreWeave	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 17.56 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.93 s TPS— Worst comparable value 32.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.33% Context 262.1K Route atlas-cloud/int4 Blended $1.9667 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 3.30 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.34 s TPS— Best comparable value 169.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 99.89% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended $1.9667 / 1M
ZA GLM 5.1Winner · CoreWeave	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 14.30 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.48 s TPS— Worst comparable value 39.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.57% Context 202.8K Route atlas-cloud/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $2.16 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.38 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.50 s TPS— Best comparable value 129.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 202.8K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $2.4 / 1M
Q Qwen3.5-35B-A3BWinner · CoreWeave	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 7.60 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.94 s TPS— Worst comparable value 75.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.86% Context 262.1K Route atlas-cloud/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.75 / 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— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.5833 / 1M
M MiniMax M2.5Winner · CoreWeave	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 12.03 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.91 s TPS— Worst comparable value 45.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.42% Context 196.6K Route atlas-cloud/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.5967 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 6.55 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.38 s TPS— Best comparable value 81.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 196.6K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.6 / 1M
D DeepSeek V3.1Winner · AtlasCloud	AtlasCloud Speed— Worst comparable value 12.80 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.17 s TPS— Worst comparable value 43.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.69% Context 131.1K Route atlas-cloud/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.5167 / 1M	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 9.97 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.35 s TPS— Best comparable value 52.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 161K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.9167 / 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.