CoreWeave vs Together: 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

1.30× typical advantage

8 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

CCoreWeave

$1.2104 / 1M

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

Most models available

TTogether

22 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

Metric	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	TTogether☆☆☆☆☆(0)
Speed	CoreWeave12.68 s	Together10.54 s
TTFT	CoreWeave0.52 s	Together0.63 s
TPS	CoreWeave51.5 tok/s	Together50.5 tok/s
Uptime	CoreWeave99.89%	Together97.21%
Blended	CoreWeave$1.2104 / 1M	Together$1.3625 / 1M

Model	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	TTogether☆☆☆☆☆(0)
ZA GLM 5.2Winner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 20.46 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.94 s TPS— Best 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	Together Speed— Worst comparable value 28.89 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 2.57 s TPS— Worst comparable value 19.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.88% Context 262.1K Route together Blended— Worst comparable value $2.4 / 1M
M Kimi K2.7 CodeWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 7.35 s TTFT— Worst 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	Together Speed— Worst comparable value 10.15 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.53 s TPS— Worst comparable value 52.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route together Blended— Worst comparable value $1.9667 / 1M
D DeepSeek V4 ProWinner · Together	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 64.00 s TTFT— Worst 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 $2.32 / 1M	Together Speed— Best comparable value 10.94 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.73 s TPS— Best comparable value 49.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 97.21% Context 512K Route together Blended $2.32 / 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	Together Speed— Worst comparable value 5.81 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.49 s TPS— Worst comparable value 94.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 97.37% Context 262.1K Route together Blended— Worst comparable value $2.3 / 1M
G Gemma 4 31BWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 30.82 s TTFT— Best 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	Together Speed— Worst comparable value 37.78 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 4.45 s TPS— Worst comparable value 15.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 88.19% Context 262.1K Route together Blended— Worst comparable value $0.4733 / 1M
O gpt-oss-120bWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 5.92 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.36 s TPS— Worst comparable value 90.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 99.68% Context 131.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended— Best comparable value $0.0733 / 1M	Together Speed— Best comparable value 5.76 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.26 s TPS— Best comparable value 91.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 95.04% Context 131.1K Route together Blended— Worst comparable value $0.3 / 1M
O gpt-oss-20bWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.18 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.28 s TPS— Best comparable value 128.0 tok/s Uptime 87.61% Context 131.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended— Best comparable value $0.0633 / 1M	Together Speed— Worst comparable value 4.82 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.23 s TPS— Worst comparable value 109.0 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 131.1K Route together Blended— Worst comparable value $0.1 / 1M
ML Llama 3.3 70B InstructWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 18.01 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.15 s TPS— Best comparable value 28.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 128K Route coreweave/fp16 Blended— Best comparable value $0.71 / 1M	Together Speed— Worst comparable value 26.16 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.16 s TPS— Worst comparable value 20.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 91.88% Context 131.1K Route together/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $1.04 / 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.