Pick Groq for the lowest-latency stock text model; pick Replicate for multimodal, custom models, and packaging flexibility. These two barely overlap, so the choice is rarely close. Replicate sells GPU time: you package any model with Cog, push it, and pay per second of A100 or H100 wall clock. Groq sells tokens on a fixed menu, served on its own LPU silicon that hits 250 to 1,660 tokens per second on Llama 3.3 70B.
That split decides almost everything: who controls the model, who eats the cold start, and what you actually pay. Replicate gives you any-model flexibility and per-second hardware billing, with the catch that idle GPUs and cold boots cost real money. Groq gives you raw speed and flat per-token pricing, with the catch that you run what is on the menu and nothing else. Cloudflare acquired Replicate in late 2025, but as of mid-2026 the per-second model and Cog workflow are unchanged.
TL;DR
- Pick Replicate if you need to run a custom model, a private fine-tune, or an image/video/audio model. Cog packages any weights, and you pay per second of GPU time ($5.04/hr A100 80GB, $5.49/hr H100). The cost is cold starts of 10 to 180 seconds and paying for idle time on dedicated instances.
- Pick Groq if you need raw speed on a supported open text model and flat per-token pricing. Llama 3.3 70B runs at 394 tok/s for $0.59/$0.79 per million tokens, with a Batch API and prompt caching each cutting that 50%. The cost is a fixed catalog: no custom weights, text and speech only.
Who Wins Per Workload
The two rarely compete for the same job. This table maps the decision you are actually making to the winner and why.
| Workload / decision | Replicate | Groq |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest latency on a stock text LLM | Groq, LPU latency floor | Groq, LPU latency floor |
| Run your own model / checkpoint | Replicate, Cog packages anything | No, fixed catalog |
| Fine-tune & host private weights | Replicate, dedicated GPUs | No custom weights |
| Multimodal (image / video / audio) | Replicate, FLUX / Veo / Kling | No, text and speech only |
| Fastest first call (no cold start) | Cold boot 10 to 180s | Groq, always-on menu |
| Bursty / low-duty traffic | Pays for idle GPU time | Groq, per-token, no idle charge |
| Sustained high-utilization serving | Replicate, cheap above ~60-70% duty | Per-token adds up at full duty |
| Tool-calling agents (schema-valid) | Assemble it yourself | Groq, 128 tools, constrained decode |
| Zero infrastructure to manage | Pick GPU tier, set autoscaling | Groq, send tokens, get tokens |
Quick Comparison
Replicate is flexible and pays by the second. Groq is fast and pays by the token. Morph is the column most coding agents actually need.
| Spec | Replicate | Groq | Morph |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core focus | Any-model GPU hosting | Fast fixed-menu serving | Coding-agent inner loop |
| Billing model | Per second of GPU time | Per token | Per token / per request |
| Hardware | Nvidia T4 / L40S / A100 / H100 | Custom LPU silicon | Code-tuned GPU kernels |
| Custom / private models | Yes, via Cog | No, fixed catalog | Code-specific models |
| Code apply endpoint | No | No | /v1/code/apply |
| Semantic code search | No | No | WarpGrep ($0/100k) |
| Apply throughput | GPU-dependent | Up to 1,660 tok/s (specdec) | ~10,500 tok/s |
| First-pass edit accuracy | N/A | N/A | 98% |
| Cold start | 10 to 180s (custom) | None (always-on menu) | Always-on |
| Llama 3.3 70B price | Per-second GPU | $0.59 / $0.79 per 1M | N/A |
| Best for | Custom & multimodal models | High-throughput open models | Search, apply, compaction |
Billing Model: Per Second vs Per Token
The single biggest difference is how you get charged, and it shapes which workloads make sense on each.
Replicate bills GPU wall-clock time per second. Public serverless models only charge while they process your request; setup and idle time on a public model are free. But most custom or private models run on dedicated hardware, where you pay for setup time, idle time, and active processing time. So a private deployment that sits idle between bursts still bills you for every second the instance is online. The exception is fast-booting fine-tunes, which charge only for active processing.
Groq bills per token, full stop. There is no idle charge, no GPU-hour, no setup fee. You send a request, you pay for the input and output tokens it consumes. A Batch API cuts that 50% for async jobs, and prompt caching cuts cached input tokens 50%; the two stack toward roughly 25% of on-demand for cacheable batch workloads.
The practical rule: Replicate wins when a GPU stays near 100% busy, because per-second time is cheap when fully utilized. Groq wins for bursty or low-duty-cycle traffic, because you never pay for idle silicon.
Pricing: Concrete Numbers
Direct comparison is awkward because the units differ, so here are both, as of early 2026.
| Hardware | Per second | Per hour |
|---|---|---|
| CPU | $0.000100 | $0.36 |
| Nvidia T4 | $0.000225 | $0.81 |
| Nvidia L40S | $0.000975 | $3.51 |
| Nvidia A100 80GB | $0.001400 | $5.04 |
| Nvidia H100 | $0.001525 | $5.49 |
Replicate also bills some official models per token (for example Claude 3.7 Sonnet at $3.00 per million input tokens), but the platform's native model is per-second hardware. Multi-GPU configs (2x, 4x, 8x) scale proportionally and require committed-spend contracts.
| Model | Input | Output | Speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Llama 3.1 8B Instant | $0.05 | $0.08 | 840 tok/s |
| Llama 3.3 70B Versatile | $0.59 | $0.79 | 394 tok/s |
| GPT-OSS 20B | $0.075 | $0.30 | 1,000 tok/s |
| GPT-OSS 120B | $0.15 | $0.60 | 500 tok/s |
| Qwen3 32B | $0.29 | $0.59 | 662 tok/s |
| Kimi K2 (0905) | $1.00 | $3.00 | N/A |
When per-second beats per-token
A model that runs flat-out 24/7 on a single A100 costs about $3,629/month on Replicate. If that same model serves enough tokens to exceed that figure at Groq's per-token rate, Replicate is cheaper. The crossover lives in utilization: dedicated hardware only pays off above roughly 60 to 70% sustained GPU duty. Below that, every idle second on Replicate is money Groq would not have charged.
Cost on a Real Workload
Cost on a real workload (computed from list prices, June 2026)
Serving Llama 3.3 70B, 20M output tokens/day. On Groq, output is $0.79 per 1M tokens, so 20 × $0.79 = $15.80/day = about $474/month, with no idle charge and no instance to keep warm.
On Replicate, the equivalent is a dedicated A100 80GB at $5.04/hr = about $3,629/month if held warm 24/7. The break-even is volume: $3,629 ÷ $0.79 per 1M = roughly 4.59B output tokens/month, or about 153M tokens/day. So the dedicated A100 only wins above ~153M output tokens/day, nearly 8x the 20M in this scenario. A single Groq stream at the published 394 tok/s produces about 34M tokens/day, so reaching the Replicate break-even on one box also requires heavy batched concurrency, not a single stream.
Below ~153M output tokens/day, Groq's per-token rate wins outright. Above it, with high enough batch utilization, a held-warm Replicate A100 wins. Redo the arithmetic with your own daily token count and the prices above.
Speed: Groq's LPU vs Replicate's GPUs
On the models Groq supports, Groq is the faster of the two by a wide margin.
Groq does not use GPUs. Its LPU (Language Processing Unit) is custom silicon built for sequential, single-stream token generation, which is exactly the part of inference where GPUs leave latency on the table. The result: 394 tok/s on Llama 3.3 70B standard, 840 tok/s on Llama 3.1 8B, and up to 1,660 tok/s on Llama 3.3 70B with speculative decoding, a 6x jump over the 250 tok/s baseline on the same 14nm chip.
Replicate speed is whatever the model and GPU tier deliver. An H100 is fast, but you are still on general Nvidia hardware running a general serving stack, and you tune throughput by choosing hardware and batch settings yourself. For interactive single-user latency, Groq wins. For batched throughput on a custom model, a well-tuned Replicate H100 deployment can be competitive.
Cold Starts: The Hidden Replicate Tax
Groq has no cold-start problem; Replicate's serverless design has a real one.
Replicate scales public models to zero to save cost, so a model that has not run recently must reload into GPU memory before it responds. Custom Cog models can take 10 to 180 seconds to boot depending on weight size: roughly 60 seconds for the machine plus another 10 or more to pull the weights. To avoid that, you keep instances warm, which means paying for idle time. Replicate has driven fine-tune cold boots under one second, but general custom deployments still pay the boot tax.
Groq serves an always-on catalog, so there is no scale-to-zero and no boot latency on a request. The trade is that you cannot bring your own weights to get that behavior; the always-on guarantee only covers models Groq already hosts.
Cold starts compound in bursty loops
Any workload that fans out many short calls pays the cold-start penalty on the first call of every cold session. On Replicate that can be a 60-second stall before the first token. Always-on serving removes that stall entirely, which matters more for latency-sensitive loops than headline throughput does. Neither is built for the coding-agent apply loop; if applying model-generated code edits is the bottleneck, that is a different tool (Morph Fast Apply, ~10,500 tok/s, with published benchmarks).
Model Catalog: Open vs Fixed
Replicate runs anything you can package; Groq runs what it has optimized.
Replicate's whole pitch is the open catalog plus Cog. You take arbitrary model code, wrap it in a Cog container, push it, and Replicate generates the API server and handles the GPU deployment. That covers language models, image generators (FLUX, Veo, Kling), audio, video, embeddings, and private fine-tunes. The cost of that flexibility is that Cog packaging is non-standard: your model is not a plain Docker image you can lift and run elsewhere.
Groq ships a curated menu: Llama 3.1/3.3, GPT-OSS 20B and 120B, Kimi K2, Qwen3 32B, and a few others, each hand-tuned for the LPU. You get speed and predictable behavior, but you cannot upload custom weights or a private fine-tune. If your model is not on the list, Groq is not an option.
| Capability | Replicate | Groq |
|---|---|---|
| Custom weights / Cog | Yes | No |
| Private fine-tunes | Yes | No |
| Image / video / audio models | Yes | No (text + speech) |
| Curated fast LLM menu | Partial | Yes |
| Bring-your-own-architecture | Yes | No |
Features & API Surface
Both expose modern API features, but aimed at different jobs.
Groq is built for agentic LLM use. It supports structured outputs with a JSON schema and strict: true constrained decoding that guarantees 100% schema adherence, parallel function calling with up to 128 tools, an OpenAI-compatible endpoint, a Batch API, prompt caching, and compound models with automatic built-in tool use. For tool-calling agents that need fast, schema-valid responses, this surface is strong.
Replicate is built for model deployment. Its API is prediction-centric: submit input, poll or stream the prediction, get output. It handles autoscaling on dedicated deployments, webhooks, and per-model schemas generated from your Cog definition. The strength is operational control over any model; the weakness is that you assemble the agent features (JSON schema enforcement, tool routing) yourself on top.
| Feature | Replicate | Groq |
|---|---|---|
| OpenAI-compatible endpoint | Partial (official models) | Yes |
| Structured output (JSON schema) | Model-dependent | Yes, constrained decoding |
| Function / tool calling | Model-dependent | Yes, up to 128 tools |
| Batch API | No native batch | Yes (50% off) |
| Prompt caching | No | Yes (50% off cached) |
| Autoscaling deployments | Yes | Managed (no instances) |
| Fine-tune hosting | Yes | No |
When to Use Replicate
- Custom or private models. If you need arbitrary weights, a private fine-tune, or an architecture Groq does not host, Cog packaging and dedicated GPUs are the reason to be here.
- Multimodal generation. Image, video, and audio models (FLUX, Veo, Kling) live on Replicate. Groq is text and speech only.
- Steady, high-utilization workloads. Per-second GPU billing is cheap when the hardware stays busy. Above roughly 60 to 70% sustained duty, dedicated instances beat per-token rates.
- Operational control. You pick the GPU tier, set autoscaling bounds, and own the serving stack. For teams that want to tune the deployment, that control is the point.
- Rapid model prototyping. Push a Cog container and get a working API in minutes without standing up your own GPU infrastructure.
When to Use Groq
- Latency-sensitive serving. 394 tok/s on Llama 3.3 70B and up to 1,660 with speculative decoding. For interactive chat or real-time agents, the LPU is the fastest of the two.
- Bursty or low-duty traffic. Per-token billing with no idle charge means you never pay for silence. Spiky workloads are far cheaper than keeping a dedicated GPU warm.
- Tool-calling agents. Constrained-decoding structured outputs and up to 128 parallel function calls make schema-valid agent responses reliable.
- Cost-sensitive open-model use. $0.05/$0.08 for Llama 3.1 8B, with Batch API and prompt caching each cutting 50%, lands among the cheapest fast serving available.
- Zero infrastructure. No instances, no cold starts, no autoscaling config. Send tokens, get tokens.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Replicate or Groq cheaper?
Cheaper depends on utilization, not on the provider. Groq is cheaper for bursty or high-throughput open-model serving: Llama 3.3 70B is $0.59/$0.79 per million input/output tokens, Llama 3.1 8B is $0.05/$0.08. Replicate bills GPU time per second ($5.04/hr A100 80GB, $5.49/hr H100), which only wins above roughly 60 to 70% sustained GPU duty. For idle or spiky workloads, Replicate's per-second dedicated billing usually costs more.
Why is Groq so much faster than Replicate?
Groq runs custom LPU silicon designed for sequential token generation, not GPUs. It hits 394 tok/s on Llama 3.3 70B and up to 1,660 tok/s with speculative decoding. Replicate runs standard Nvidia hardware (T4, L40S, A100, H100), so speed depends on the model and tier you choose. For single-stream latency on supported models, Groq is faster.
Can I run any model on Groq?
No. Groq serves a fixed catalog (Llama 3.1/3.3, GPT-OSS 20B/120B, Kimi K2, Qwen3 32B, and a few more). You cannot upload custom weights or a private fine-tune. Replicate is the opposite: package any model with Cog and run it on dedicated GPUs, including custom architectures and private fine-tunes.
Does Replicate have cold starts?
Yes. Public serverless models scale to zero, and custom Cog models can take 10 to 180 seconds to boot depending on weight size, because the container and weights load into GPU memory on demand. Fine-tune cold boots are now under one second, but general custom deployments still pay the boot tax unless you keep instances warm and pay for idle time.
Can I move a model from Replicate to Groq or vice versa?
Only if the model is on Groq's menu. Replicate packages models as Cog containers, a non-standard format that does not lift-and-shift to any other host, including Groq, which accepts no custom weights at all. Going the other direction is easy: any open model Groq serves (Llama 3.1/3.3, GPT-OSS, Qwen3 32B) can also be packaged for Replicate, you just trade Groq's LPU latency floor for whatever a Replicate GPU tier delivers. The two are not interchangeable runtimes; they are different deployment models that happen to overlap on a few open LLMs.
Related Comparisons
Pick Groq for Speed, Replicate for Reach
Groq is the fastest stock text model; Replicate runs anything you can package. If applying model-generated code edits is your bottleneck, that is a separate job.