Nebius
13 indexed models
- Headquarters
Netherlands- Server regions
- N/a
- Model types
- 12 text, 1 embeddings
Same-model provider benchmark
Nebius vs SiliconFlow: LLM provider comparison
Compare Nebius and SiliconFlow on 4 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
1.26× typical advantage
4 exact models with complete recent speed data
Lowest token cost
$0.6667 / 1M
4 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 | Nebius | SiliconFlow |
|---|---|---|
| Typical 500-token response | 13.64 s | 16.56 s |
| Typical response start | 0.66 s | 1.97 s |
| Typical output speed | 54.5 tok/s | 35.0 tok/s |
| Blended token price | $0.7583 / 1M | $0.6667 / 1M |
| Typical route uptime | 98.30% | 80.57% |
Visual comparison
Price and performance charts
SiliconFlowEstimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.
Nebius has the lower typical same-model response ratio across 4 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 4 priced shared models.
| Model | Nebius | SiliconFlow |
|---|---|---|
 GLM 5.1Winner · SiliconFlow z-ai/glm-5.1 | Nebius
| SiliconFlow
|
 gpt-oss-120bWinner · Nebius openai/gpt-oss-120b | Nebius
| SiliconFlow
|
 Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Winner · Nebius qwen/qwen3-30b-a3b-instruct-2507 | Nebius
| SiliconFlow
|
Qwen3 32BWinner · Nebius qwen/qwen3-32b | Nebius
| 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.
Nebius vs SiliconFlow analysis
How Nebius and SiliconFlow compare for AI inference
Nebius and SiliconFlow share 4 indexed text models, including GLM 5.1, gpt-oss-120b, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507, Qwen3 32B. Nebius has the stronger typical response-time result on the directly measured set.
Same-model speed evidence
4 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
4 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
Nebius has 13 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 Nebius and SiliconFlow.
