Skip to content

Same-model provider benchmark

Groq vs Nebius: LLM provider comparison

Compare Groq and Nebius on 3 exact shared text models. ProviderBench keeps speed, price, and catalog coverage separate so naturally faster model catalogs cannot distort the result.

Groq

11 indexed models

Headquarters
United States
Server regions
N/a
Model types
9 text, 2 transcription

Nebius

13 indexed models

Headquarters
Netherlands
Server regions
N/a
Model types
12 text, 1 embeddings

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

6.52× typical advantage

3 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

$0.2289 / 1M

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

Most models available

13 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

MetricGroqNebius
Typical 500-token response1.48 s20.66 s
Typical response start0.26 s0.66 s
Typical output speed391.0 tok/s25.0 tok/s
Blended token price$0.4489 / 1M$0.2289 / 1M
Typical route uptime99.99%97.93%

Visual comparison

Price and performance charts

GroqNebius
500-token response by shared model

Estimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.

Groq has the lower typical same-model response ratio across 3 measured models.

Blended token price by shared model

USD per 1 million tokens using a 1,000-input/500-output mix. Lower is better.

Nebius has the lower typical price ratio across 3 priced shared models.

Shared text models

3 exact models · newest first

ModelGroqNebius
gpt-oss-120bWinner · Groq

openai/gpt-oss-120b

Groq
Blended price
$0.3 / 1M
500-token response
1.48 s
Response starts
0.20 s
Output speed
391.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.99%
Context
131.1K
Route
groq
Nebius
Blended price
$0.3 / 1M
500-token response
6.62 s
Response starts
0.67 s
Output speed
84.0 tok/s
Route uptime
97.33%
Context
131.1K
Route
nebius/fp4
Qwen3 32BWinner · Groq

qwen/qwen3-32b

Groq
Blended price
$0.39 / 1M
500-token response
1.42 s
Response starts
0.26 s
Output speed
433.0 tok/s
Route uptime
100.00%
Context
131.1K
Route
groq
Nebius
Blended price
$0.1667 / 1M
500-token response
20.66 s
Response starts
0.66 s
Output speed
25.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.27%
Context
41K
Route
nebius/base

meta-llama/llama-3.3-70b-instruct

Groq
Blended price
$0.6567 / 1M
500-token response
3.26 s
Response starts
0.29 s
Output speed
168.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.51%
Context
131.1K
Route
groq
Nebius
Blended price
$0.22 / 1M
500-token response
21.28 s
Response starts
0.45 s
Output speed
24.0 tok/s
Route uptime
97.93%
Context
131.1K
Route
nebius/fp8

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.

Groq vs Nebius analysis

How Groq and Nebius compare for AI inference

Groq and Nebius share 3 indexed text models, including gpt-oss-120b, Qwen3 32B, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct. Groq 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

Groq has 11 indexed models and lists no published server regions; Nebius has 13 models and lists no regions. 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 Groq and Nebius.