Cerebras ranks #8 of 14 in our llm inference providers testing. the fastest inference hardware built, attached to a pricing page that wouldn't tell us what anything costs..
76/100
the technology is genuinely in a class of its own and the subscription tiers are good value — but we could not verify a single per-token rate, and that costs it eight places.
why people look for an alternative
−per-model token prices unreadable across three attempts
−speed marketed as '20x' with no model or figure attached
−no published numeric rate limits
−a preview model is already scheduled for deprecation
stay with Cerebras if fastest inference hardware in the category by a wide margin is the thing you care about most — nothing below beats it on that.
#4 in llm inference providers · every deployment shape from serverless to your own gpu cluster — at the highest llama price on this list.
86/100
verdictthe widest ladder in the category — pay-per-token, provisioned throughput, dedicated instances, whole clusters — and you pay for the ladder on every token.
Together AI vs Cerebras
Cerebras
Together AI
price
unpublished
$1.04 / 1m in
free tier
yes
no
billing
per-token + subscriptions
per-token to dedicated
llama 70b input
unpublished
$1.04/1m
deepseek v4
unpublished
$1.74/1m in
glm-5.2
unpublished
$1.40/1m in
batch discount
unpublished
none; commit instead
switch forteams who expect to graduate from serverless to reserved throughput or dedicated hardware without changing vendor.
pros
+serverless through ptu, dedicated instances and full clusters
+same-day access to new frontier open releases
+steep cached-input rates across deepseek, glm and qwen
+volume discounts up to 32% on commitments
cons
−10x deepinfra's price on the anchor llama model
−no batch api discount — savings require capacity commitments
−no published rate limits; dynamic and account-level
#5 in llm inference providers · the only vendor here that prints tokens-per-second next to the price — on a catalogue of five models.
85/100
verdictuniquely transparent about throughput and priced fairly for it — but a five-model catalogue with no deepseek and no glm rules it out for a lot of work.
Groq vs Cerebras
Cerebras
Groq
price
unpublished
$0.59 / 1m in
free tier
yes
yes
billing
per-token + subscriptions
per-token
llama 70b input
unpublished
$0.59/1m
deepseek v4
unpublished
not served
glm-5.2
unpublished
not served
batch discount
unpublished
50%
switch forlatency-sensitive products that can live on llama or gpt-oss and want the speed number in writing.
pros
+per-model tokens-per-second published on the pricing page
+50% off both batch and cached input
+openai sdk drop-in compatibility
+genuinely low latency at a mid-field price
cons
−only five models on the public pricing page
−no deepseek and no glm models at all
−free tier capped at 1,000 requests a day on the 70b
#6 in llm inference providers · one endpoint in front of the whole market, at genuinely no markup — which makes the routing itself the product.
84/100
verdictcharges nothing to sit in the middle, which is rare enough to be worth using — you just can't look up 'the openrouter price' for anything, because there isn't one.
OpenRouter vs Cerebras
Cerebras
OpenRouter
price
unpublished
the routed provider's price
free tier
yes
yes
billing
per-token + subscriptions
pass-through
llama 70b input
unpublished
routed provider's rate
deepseek v4
unpublished
via routed provider
glm-5.2
unpublished
via routed provider
batch discount
unpublished
provider's own
switch foranyone still choosing, still comparing, or wanting to switch providers without shipping a code change.
pros
+no markup on standard inference, per its own faq
+one openai-compatible endpoint across most of this list
+switching provider or model needs no code change
+free tier for evaluation, 1,000 requests/day after $10 credit
cons
−no price list of its own — cost depends entirely on routing
−byok costs 5% beyond 1m requests a month
−free models explicitly not recommended for production
#10 in llm inference providers · sixty-plus current open models behind a price table that won't render, during a rename.
70/100
verdictthe catalogue looks right and the european base may matter for your data rules — but you cannot compare it on price without signing up, and it's mid-rebrand.
Nebius AI Studio vs Cerebras
Cerebras
Nebius AI Studio
price
unpublished
unpublished
free tier
yes
no
billing
per-token + subscriptions
per-token
llama 70b input
unpublished
unpublished
deepseek v4
unpublished
offered, price unreadable
glm-5.2
unpublished
glm-5.1 listed
batch discount
unpublished
unpublished
switch forbuyers who will open the dashboard themselves and want breadth from a european provider.
every tool on this page went through the same test as Cerebras — same tasks, same order, scored the same way. the comparison tables are the figures from that testing, not vendor spec sheets.