CoreWeave vs Venice: 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

1.14× typical advantage

12 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

VVenice

$1.2121 / 1M

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

Most models available

VVenice

30 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

Metric	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	VVenice☆☆☆☆☆(0)
Speed	CoreWeave8.20 s	Venice11.32 s
TTFT	CoreWeave0.44 s	Venice1.17 s
TPS	CoreWeave66.0 tok/s	Venice49.0 tok/s
Uptime	CoreWeave99.92%	Venice99.82%
Blended	CoreWeave$1.3297 / 1M	Venice$1.2121 / 1M

Model	CCoreWeave☆☆☆☆☆(0)	VVenice☆☆☆☆☆(0)
ZA GLM 5.2Winner · Venice	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 20.46 s TTFT— Worst 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	Venice Speed— Best comparable value 16.70 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.55 s TPS— Best comparable value 33.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.93% Context 1M Route venice/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $2.4 / 1M
M Kimi K2.7 CodeWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 7.35 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.68 s TPS— Best comparable value 75.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/int4 Blended— Worst comparable value $1.96 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 9.56 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.81 s TPS— Worst comparable value 64.5 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 256K Route venice/int4 Blended— Best comparable value $1.6667 / 1M
Q Qwen3.6 35B A3BWinner · Venice	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 3.72 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.26 s TPS— Worst comparable value 144.5 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.5833 / 1M	Venice Speed— Best comparable value 2.91 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.57 s TPS— Best comparable value 214.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 256K Route venice/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.4333 / 1M
Q Qwen3.6 27BWinner · Venice	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 18.18 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.33 s TPS— Worst 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	Venice Speed— Best comparable value 9.77 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.68 s TPS— Best comparable value 55.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 99.71% Context 256K Route venice/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $1.3 / 1M
D DeepSeek V4 ProWinner · Venice	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— Worst comparable value $2.32 / 1M	Venice Speed— Best comparable value 12.87 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.24 s TPS— Best comparable value 43.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 95.12% Context 1M Route venice Blended— Best comparable value $2.2003 / 1M
D DeepSeek V4 FlashWinner · Venice	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 17.27 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.60 s TPS— Worst comparable value 30.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 99.85% Context 1M Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.1867 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 17.53 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.90 s TPS— Best comparable value 32.0 tok/s Uptime— Worst comparable value 98.80% Context 1M Route venice Blended— Best comparable value $0.1837 / 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— Worst comparable value 99.89% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp4 Blended— Worst comparable value $1.9667 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 13.48 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 0.98 s TPS— Worst comparable value 40.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 100.00% Context 256K Route venice/int4 Blended— Best comparable value $1.6667 / 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— Best comparable value $2.4 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 7.55 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.30 s TPS— Worst comparable value 80.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 200K Route venice/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $2.64 / 1M
G Gemma 4 31BWinner · Venice	CoreWeave Speed— Worst comparable value 30.82 s TTFT— Worst 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	Venice Speed— Best comparable value 23.82 s TTFT— Best comparable value 1.10 s TPS— Best comparable value 22.0 tok/s Uptime— Best comparable value 98.68% Context 256K Route venice/bf16 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.2 / 1M
Q Qwen3.5-35B-A3BWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 4.86 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.35 s TPS— Best comparable value 111.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 262.1K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.5833 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 6.76 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.04 s TPS— Worst comparable value 87.5 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 256K Route venice Blended— Worst comparable value $0.625 / 1M
M MiniMax M2.5Winner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 6.55 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.38 s TPS— Worst comparable value 81.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 196.6K Route coreweave/fp8 Blended— Worst comparable value $0.6 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 9.64 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 4.37 s TPS— Best comparable value 95.0 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 198K Route venice Blended— Best comparable value $0.4967 / 1M
Q Qwen3 Coder 480B A35BWinner · CoreWeave	CoreWeave Speed— Best comparable value 9.06 s TTFT— Best comparable value 0.29 s TPS— Best comparable value 57.0 tok/s Uptime N/a Context 262.1K Route coreweave/bf16 Blended— Worst comparable value $1.1667 / 1M	Venice Speed— Worst comparable value 16.67 s TTFT— Worst comparable value 1.05 s TPS— Worst comparable value 32.0 tok/s Uptime 100.00% Context 256K Route venice/fp8 Blended— Best comparable value $0.7333 / 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.