Start typing to search.
Ranks providers by estimated time to return 500 tokens, combining the wait for the first token with output speed.
Ionstream currently ranks first at 9.93 s via ionstream/fp8.
| Rank | Provider / route | Estimated response time | Speed measurements | Endpoint details |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Provider / route Ionstream ionstream/fp8 | Estimated response time9.93 s | Speed measurements
| Endpoint details
|
| #2 | Provider / route Parasail parasail/bf16 | Estimated response time10.05 s | Speed measurements
| Endpoint details
|
| #3 | Provider / route StreamLake streamlake | Estimated response time12.95 s | Speed measurements
| Endpoint details
|
| #4 | Provider / route Alibaba Cloud Int. alibaba | Estimated response time14.06 s | Speed measurements
| Endpoint details
|
| #5 | Provider / route NovitaAI novita/fp8 | Estimated response time37.05 s | Speed measurements
| Endpoint details
|
Endpoint data fetched .
Qwen3 Coder Next endpoint guide
5 of 5 Qwen3 Coder Next endpoints currently have the published data required for this ranking. Ionstream leads at 9.93 s via ionstream/fp8. The table keeps unranked routes visible so missing measurements do not look like missing provider availability.
The fastest ranking estimates a 500-token answer by adding the recent median first-token wait to 500 divided by median output throughput. It represents an example complete response, not a guarantee for every prompt or request size.
Parasail currently ranks second at 10.05 s. Compare that gap with input and output price, response-start time, output speed, 30-minute uptime, context length, and the exact route before deciding whether first place is meaningful for your workload.
Qwen3 Coder Next has 5 published provider options, and performance data is matched to each exact OpenRouter routing tag. Different quantization, context, regional deployment, or provider configuration can change price and behavior even when the underlying model name is identical.
