MARA
4 indexed models
- Headquarters
United States- Server regions
- United States
- Model types
- 4 text
Same-model provider benchmark
MARA vs SiliconFlow: LLM provider comparison
Compare MARA 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
4.37× typical advantage
3 exact models with complete recent speed data
Lowest token cost
$0.4322 / 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 | MARA | SiliconFlow |
|---|---|---|
| Typical 500-token response | 9.15 s | 33.11 s |
| Typical response start | 1.67 s | 1.86 s |
| Typical output speed | 109.0 tok/s | 16.0 tok/s |
| Blended token price | $0.5989 / 1M | $0.4322 / 1M |
| Typical route uptime | 67.50% | 79.16% |
Visual comparison
Price and performance charts
SiliconFlowEstimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.
MARA 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 | MARA | SiliconFlow |
|---|---|---|
 MiniMax M2.5Winner · MARA minimax/minimax-m2.5 | MARA
| SiliconFlow
|
 DeepSeek V3.1Winner · MARA deepseek/deepseek-chat-v3.1 | MARA
| SiliconFlow
|
 gpt-oss-120bWinner · MARA openai/gpt-oss-120b | MARA
| 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.
MARA vs SiliconFlow analysis
How MARA and SiliconFlow compare for AI inference
MARA and SiliconFlow share 3 indexed text models, including MiniMax M2.5, DeepSeek V3.1, gpt-oss-120b. MARA 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
MARA has 4 indexed models and lists 1 published server region; 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 MARA and SiliconFlow.
