Chutes
8 indexed models
- Headquarters
United States- Server regions
- N/a
- Model types
- 8 text
Same-model provider benchmark
Chutes vs ModelRun: LLM provider comparison
Compare Chutes and ModelRun on 3 exact shared text models. ProviderBench keeps speed, price, and catalog coverage separate so naturally faster model catalogs cannot distort the result.
ModelRun
4 indexed models
- Headquarters
- United States
- Server regions
- United States
- Model types
- 4 text
At a glance
Metric winners
There is no overall score. Each winner answers one specific question using only directly comparable data.
Shared-model benchmark summary
| Metric | Chutes | ModelRun |
|---|---|---|
| Typical 500-token response | 31.19 s | 13.99 s |
| Typical response start | 2.91 s | 0.90 s |
| Typical output speed | 19.0 tok/s | 40.0 tok/s |
| Blended token price | $0.9233 / 1M | $0.9433 / 1M |
| Typical route uptime | 91.79% | 98.64% |
Visual comparison
Price and performance charts
Estimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.
ModelRun has the lower typical same-model response ratio across 3 measured models.
USD per 1 million tokens using a 1,000-input/500-output mix. Lower is better.
Chutes has the lower typical price ratio across 3 priced shared models.
| Model | Chutes | ModelRun |
|---|---|---|
 Kimi K2.6Winner · ModelRun moonshotai/kimi-k2.6 | Chutes
| ModelRun
|
 Gemma 4 31BWinner · ModelRun google/gemma-4-31b-it | Chutes
| ModelRun
|
Kimi K2.5Winner · ModelRun moonshotai/kimi-k2.5 | Chutes
| ModelRun
|
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.
Chutes vs ModelRun analysis
How Chutes and ModelRun compare for AI inference
Chutes and ModelRun share 3 indexed text models, including Kimi K2.6, Gemma 4 31B, Kimi K2.5. ModelRun has the stronger typical response-time result on the directly measured set.
Same-model speed evidence
3 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
3 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
Chutes has 8 indexed models and lists no published server regions; ModelRun has 4 models and lists 1 region. 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 Chutes and ModelRun.
