Skip to content
ProviderBench home

Same-model provider benchmark

StreamLake vs Wafer: LLM provider comparison

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

StreamLake

20 indexed models

Headquarters
China
Server regions
N/a
Model types
20 text

Wafer

3 indexed models

Headquarters
United States
Server regions
N/a
Model types
3 text

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

Wafer

1.44× typical advantage

3 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

StreamLake

$1.2525 / 1M

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

Most models available

StreamLake

20 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

MetricStreamLake(0)Wafer(0)
SpeedStreamLake14.38 sWafer14.75 s
TTFTStreamLake1.62 sWafer4.95 s
TPSStreamLake40.0 tok/sWafer53.0 tok/s
UptimeStreamLake99.57%Wafer100.00%
BlendedStreamLake$1.2525 / 1MWafer$1.9111 / 1M
Green value Better comparable resultRed value Worse comparable result

Visual comparison

Price and performance charts

StreamLakeWafer
500-token response by shared model

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

Wafer 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.

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

Shared text models

3 exact models · newest first

ModelStreamLake(0)Wafer(0)
GLM 5.2Winner · StreamLake
StreamLake
Speed— Worst comparable value
13.20 s
TTFT— Best comparable value
1.58 s
TPS— Worst comparable value
43.0 tok/s
Uptime— Worst comparable value
99.57%
Context
1M
Route
streamlake/fp8
Blended— Best comparable value
$1.2084 / 1M
Wafer
Speed— Best comparable value
9.16 s
TTFT— Worst comparable value
2.41 s
TPS— Best comparable value
74.0 tok/s
Uptime— Best comparable value
100.00%
Context
1M
Route
wafer/fp4
Blended— Worst comparable value
$2.4 / 1M
DeepSeek V4 ProWinner · StreamLake
StreamLake
Speed— Best comparable value
14.38 s
TTFT— Best comparable value
1.88 s
TPS— Worst comparable value
40.0 tok/s
Uptime— Best comparable value
99.39%
Context
1M
Route
streamlake/fp8
Blended— Best comparable value
$0.8932 / 1M
Wafer
Speed— Worst comparable value
14.75 s
TTFT— Worst comparable value
4.95 s
TPS— Best comparable value
51.0 tok/s
Uptime— Worst comparable value
99.28%
Context
1M
Route
wafer/fp4
Blended— Worst comparable value
$1.6 / 1M
GLM 5.1Winner · Wafer
StreamLake
Speed— Worst comparable value
24.35 s
TTFT— Best comparable value
1.62 s
TPS— Worst comparable value
22.0 tok/s
Uptime— Worst comparable value
99.79%
Context
200K
Route
streamlake/fp8
Blended— Best comparable value
$1.656 / 1M
Wafer
Speed— Best comparable value
15.15 s
TTFT— Worst comparable value
5.71 s
TPS— Best comparable value
53.0 tok/s
Uptime— Best comparable value
100.00%
Context
202.8K
Route
wafer/fp4
Blended— Worst comparable value
$1.7333 / 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 . Values use one deterministic route per provider and model; missing measurements remain visible as N/a.

StreamLake vs Wafer analysis

How StreamLake and Wafer compare for AI inference

StreamLake and Wafer share 3 indexed text models, including GLM 5.2, DeepSeek V4 Pro, GLM 5.1. Wafer 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

StreamLake has 20 indexed models and lists no published server regions; Wafer has 3 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 StreamLake and Wafer.

StreamLake vs NovitaAI

16 shared model benchmarks

Wafer vs AtlasCloud

3 shared model benchmarks

StreamLake vs DeepInfra

14 shared model benchmarks

Wafer vs Baidu Qianfan

3 shared model benchmarks

StreamLake vs SiliconFlow

12 shared model benchmarks

Wafer vs CoreWeave

3 shared model benchmarks