Skip to content
ProviderBench home

Same-model provider benchmark

Baseten vs Phala: LLM provider comparison

Compare Baseten and Phala on 4 exact shared text models. ProviderBench keeps speed, price, and catalog coverage separate so naturally faster model catalogs cannot distort the result.

Baseten

5 indexed models

Headquarters
United States
Server regions
N/a
Model types
5 text

Phala

18 indexed models

Headquarters
United States
Server regions
N/a
Model types
18 text

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

Baseten

3.40× typical advantage

4 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

Baseten

$1.725 / 1M

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

Most models available

Phala

18 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

MetricBasetenPhala
Typical 500-token response7.50 s22.32 s
Typical response start1.50 s2.47 s
Typical output speed83.5 tok/s33.0 tok/s
Blended token price$1.725 / 1M$1.7917 / 1M
Typical route uptime99.99%93.29%

Visual comparison

Price and performance charts

BasetenPhala
500-token response by shared model

Estimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.

Baseten has the lower typical same-model response ratio across 4 measured models.

Blended token price by shared model

USD per 1 million tokens using a 1,000-input/500-output mix. Lower is better.

Baseten has the lower typical price ratio across 4 priced shared models.

Shared text models

4 exact models · newest first

ModelBasetenPhala
GLM 5.2Winner · Baseten

z-ai/glm-5.2

Baseten
Blended price
$2.4 / 1M
500-token response
5.86 s
Response starts
0.24 s
Output speed
89.0 tok/s
Route uptime
100.00%
Context
256K
Route
baseten/fp8
Phala
Blended price
$2.4 / 1M
500-token response
16.81 s
Response starts
2.10 s
Output speed
34.0 tok/s
Route uptime
86.82%
Context
1M
Route
phala
Kimi K2.6Winner · Baseten

moonshotai/kimi-k2.6

Baseten
Blended price
$1.9667 / 1M
500-token response
18.00 s
Response starts
3.51 s
Output speed
34.5 tok/s
Route uptime
N/a
Context
262K
Route
baseten/fp4
Phala
Blended price
$2.26 / 1M
500-token response
27.84 s
Response starts
2.84 s
Output speed
20.0 tok/s
Route uptime
N/a
Context
262.1K
Route
phala
GLM 5.1Winner · Baseten

z-ai/glm-5.1

Baseten
Blended price
$2.3 / 1M
500-token response
9.15 s
Response starts
2.74 s
Output speed
78.0 tok/s
Route uptime
96.53%
Context
202.8K
Route
baseten/fp4
Phala
Blended price
$2.2067 / 1M
500-token response
38.16 s
Response starts
22.53 s
Output speed
32.0 tok/s
Route uptime
N/a
Context
202.8K
Route
phala
gpt-oss-120bWinner · Baseten

openai/gpt-oss-120b

Baseten
Blended price
$0.2333 / 1M
500-token response
2.29 s
Response starts
0.26 s
Output speed
246.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.98%
Context
128.1K
Route
baseten/fp4
Phala
Blended price
$0.3 / 1M
500-token response
12.10 s
Response starts
0.74 s
Output speed
44.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.76%
Context
131.1K
Route
phala

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 . Values use one deterministic route per provider and model; missing measurements remain visible as N/a.

Baseten vs Phala analysis

How Baseten and Phala compare for AI inference

Baseten and Phala share 4 indexed text models, including GLM 5.2, Kimi K2.6, GLM 5.1, gpt-oss-120b. Baseten has the stronger typical response-time result on the directly measured set.

Same-model speed evidence

4 shared models currently have complete response-start and output-speed measurements on both providers. The speed comparison uses per-model ratios before taking the median, so naturally faster model catalogs do not improve the result.

Token pricing on one workload

4 shared models have complete input and output prices on both providers. Prices use the same 1,000-input/500-output-token mix and are normalized to one million tokens for readability.

Catalog and deployment differences

Baseten has 5 indexed models and lists no published server regions; Phala has 18 models and lists no regions. Verify data residency, privacy terms, limits, and production latency directly before choosing.

Related same-model benchmarks

Compare with other providers

Explore qualified alternatives with the most shared measured models. Recommendations include comparisons for both Baseten and Phala.

Baseten vs DeepInfra

5 shared model benchmarks

Phala vs NovitaAI

15 shared model benchmarks

Baseten vs DigitalOcean

5 shared model benchmarks

Phala vs SiliconFlow

14 shared model benchmarks

Baseten vs Parasail

5 shared model benchmarks

Phala vs Venice

11 shared model benchmarks