CoreWeave vs Phala: 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

1.79× typical advantage

9 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

CCoreWeave

$1.0511 / 1M

9 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)	PPhala☆☆☆☆☆(0)
Speed	CoreWeave6.55 s	Phala16.13 s
TTFT	CoreWeave0.36 s	Phala1.48 s
TPS	CoreWeave81.0 tok/s	Phala38.0 tok/s
Uptime	CoreWeave99.89%	Phala99.50%
Blended	CoreWeave$1.0511 / 1M	Phala$1.0541 / 1M

Model	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	PPhala☆☆☆☆☆(0)
ZA GLM 5.2Winner · Phala	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— Best comparable value $2.3933 / 1M	Phala Speed— Best comparable value 16.13 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 2.97 s TPS— Best comparable value 38.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.01% Context 1M Route phala Blended— Worst comparable value $2.4 / 1M
Q Qwen3.6 27BWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 18.18 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.33 s TPS— Best comparable value 28.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $1.6 / 1M	Phala Speed— Worst comparable value 32.52 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.27 s TPS— Worst comparable value 16.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 95.52% Context 262.1K Route phala Blended— Best comparable value $1.1133 / 1M
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— Best comparable value $1.9667 / 1M	Phala Speed— Worst comparable value 17.11 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.48 s TPS— Worst comparable value 32.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.50% Context 262.1K Route phala Blended— Worst comparable value $2.26 / 1M
ZA GLM 5.1Winner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.38 s TTFT— Best 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	Phala Speed— Worst comparable value 27.24 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 4.51 s TPS— Worst comparable value 22.0 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 202.8K Route phala Blended— Best comparable value $2.2067 / 1M
G Gemma 4 31BWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 30.82 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.41 s TPS— Worst 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	Phala Speed— Best comparable value 30.03 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 2.25 s TPS— Best comparable value 18.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 85.80% Context 262.1K Route phala Blended— Worst comparable value $0.2533 / 1M
M MiniMax M2.5Winner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 6.55 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.38 s TPS— Best comparable value 81.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 196.6K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.6 / 1M	Phala Speed— Worst comparable value 14.38 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.56 s TPS— Worst comparable value 39.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 196.6K Route phala Blended— Best comparable value $0.5933 / 1M
O gpt-oss-120bWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 5.92 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.36 s TPS 90.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.68% Context 131.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended— Best comparable value $0.0733 / 1M	Phala Speed— Worst comparable value 6.67 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.12 s TPS 90.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 131.1K Route phala Blended— Worst comparable value $0.3 / 1M
O gpt-oss-20bWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.18 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.28 s TPS— Best comparable value 128.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 87.61% Context 131.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended— Best comparable value $0.0633 / 1M	Phala Speed— Worst comparable value 9.42 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.65 s TPS— Worst comparable value 57.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 131.1K Route phala Blended— Worst comparable value $0.0767 / 1M
Q Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Winner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 8.22 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.28 s TPS— Worst comparable value 63.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/bf16 Blended— Best comparable value $0.1667 / 1M	Phala Speed— Best comparable value 5.36 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.21 s TPS— Best comparable value 120.5 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 262.1K Route phala Blended— Worst comparable value $0.2833 / 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.