io.net
3 indexed models
- Headquarters
United States- Server regions
- N/a
- Model types
- 3 text
Same-model provider benchmark
io.net vs SiliconFlow: LLM provider comparison
Compare io.net and SiliconFlow on 3 exact shared text models. ProviderBench keeps speed, price, and catalog coverage separate so naturally faster model catalogs cannot distort the result.
SiliconFlow
36 indexed models
- Headquarters
Singapore- Server regions
- United States
- Model types
- 35 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
1.08× typical advantage
3 exact models with complete recent speed data
Lowest token cost
$1.2262 / 1M
3 exact models using a 1K-input/500-output mix
Most models available
36 models
Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities
Shared-model benchmark summary
| Metric | io.net | SiliconFlow |
|---|---|---|
| Typical 500-token response | 34.11 s | 20.11 s |
| Typical response start | 1.79 s | 1.75 s |
| Typical output speed | 15.0 tok/s | 30.0 tok/s |
| Blended token price | $1.2455 / 1M | $1.2262 / 1M |
| Typical route uptime | 99.27% | 98.57% |
Visual comparison
Price and performance charts
SiliconFlowEstimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.
io.net has the lower typical same-model response ratio across 3 measured models.
USD per 1 million tokens using a 1,000-input/500-output mix. Lower is better.
SiliconFlow has the lower typical price ratio across 3 priced shared models.
| Model | io.net | SiliconFlow |
|---|---|---|
 GLM 5.2Winner · SiliconFlow z-ai/glm-5.2 | io.net
| SiliconFlow
|
 Qwen3.6 27BWinner · io.net qwen/qwen3.6-27b | io.net
| SiliconFlow
|
 DeepSeek V4 FlashWinner · SiliconFlow deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash | io.net
| SiliconFlow
|
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.
io.net vs SiliconFlow analysis
How io.net and SiliconFlow compare for AI inference
io.net and SiliconFlow share 3 indexed text models, including GLM 5.2, Qwen3.6 27B, DeepSeek V4 Flash. io.net 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
io.net has 3 indexed models and lists no published server regions; SiliconFlow has 36 models and lists 1 region. 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 io.net and SiliconFlow.
