CoreWeave vs Crusoe: 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

1.80× typical advantage

4 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

CCrusoe

$1.1358 / 1M

4 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	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	CCrusoe☆☆☆☆☆(0)
Speed	CoreWeave11.20 s	Crusoe24.62 s
TTFT	CoreWeave0.42 s	Crusoe0.77 s
TPS	CoreWeave78.5 tok/s	Crusoe25.5 tok/s
Uptime	CoreWeave99.94%	Crusoe95.52%
Blended	CoreWeave$1.3183 / 1M	Crusoe$1.1358 / 1M

Model	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	CCrusoe☆☆☆☆☆(0)
M Kimi K2.6Winner · CoreWeave	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— Worst comparable value $1.9667 / 1M	Crusoe Speed— Worst comparable value 34.64 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.31 s TPS— Worst comparable value 15.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 56.00% Context 262.1K Route crusoe/bf16 Blended— Best comparable value $1.6333 / 1M
ZA GLM 5.1Winner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.38 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.50 s TPS— Best comparable value 129.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 202.8K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $2.4 / 1M	Crusoe Speed— Worst comparable value 5.89 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.39 s TPS— Worst comparable value 91.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 202.8K Route crusoe/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $2.2667 / 1M
G Gemma 4 31BWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 30.82 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.41 s TPS— Best comparable value 17.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 77.67% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/bf16 Blended— Best comparable value $0.1967 / 1M	Crusoe Speed— Worst comparable value 84.17 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.83 s TPS— Worst comparable value 6.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 91.12% Context 262.1K Route crusoe Blended— Worst comparable value $0.2267 / 1M
ML Llama 3.3 70B InstructWinner · Crusoe	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 18.01 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.15 s TPS— Worst comparable value 28.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 128K Route coreweave/fp16 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.71 / 1M	Crusoe Speed— Best comparable value 14.59 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.70 s TPS— Best comparable value 36.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.91% Context 131.1K Route crusoe/bf16 Blended— Best comparable value $0.4167 / 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.