Steady traffic shouldn't mean a rising bill
On DeepInfra, the busier your model gets, the more you pay, with no flat monthly option.
DeepInfra is self-serve, billed per GPU-minute.
Featherless is fully managed: a dedicated 1 TB node, deployed and monitored around the clock by our engineers, for a flat $7,500 a month.
Monthly cost, running 24/7
47%
less than DeepInfra's 4x B300 for GLM 5.3
1.8x
the GPU memory of DeepInfra's 4x H200, for less
40,000+
models on one API key
Teams switch from DeepInfra because bills rise with traffic, your team runs the GPUs, the model catalogue is limited, and your data stays in North America.
On DeepInfra, the busier your model gets, the more you pay, with no flat monthly option.
Your engineers have to size the GPUs, set scaling and stay on call.
You rent a GPU, then size, scale and monitor it yourself.
DeepInfra's data centres are in the US and Canada.
DeepInfra charges for the hardware, while Featherless charges one flat price for the hardware and the team.
| Item | ||
|---|---|---|
| Best for | One or two models with steady traffic | Raw GPUs for training, batch jobs and research |
| Monthly price | $7,500 for 1 TB | $14,279 for 1.08 TB (4x B300, running 24/7) |
| Who runs it | Our engineers, including on-call | Your team |
| Models | 40,000+ on one API key, plus your own node | DeepInfra's catalogue, or a GPU you rent |
| Traffic spikes | Burst to our shared pool, same API key | Add GPUs, if capacity is free |
| Billing | Flat monthly | Per GPU-minute, and scales to zero when idle |
You're paying DeepInfra for GPUs, and paying your engineers to run them.
Featherless puts both in one flat price: a 1 TB node and the team that runs it, for $7,500 a month.
For large models like GLM 5.3, running all day on dedicated GPUs, Featherless costs about half of DeepInfra, with the engineers included.

| Model, running 24/7 | ||
|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V4 Flash284B, about 185 GB with KV cache | $7,500 on a half node, or per token on our shared pool | $3,570 on 1x B300, 270 GB |
| GLM 5.3753B, about 870 GB with KV cache | $7,500 on a half node, 1 TB | $14,279 on 4x B300, 1.08 TB |
| Engineers to run it | Included: deployment, tuning and on-call | Your team |
DeepInfra rates from deepinfra.com/pricing, checked 14 October 2026. Memory includes 15% for the KV cache.
Using DeepInfra's per-token API? Get your break-even
Looking for a DeepInfra alternative? Our engineers move your model from DeepInfra for you, start to finish.
An engineer will reply to you within one business day.
Something went wrong. Please check the fields and try again.
An engineer replies with your node price. No newsletter.
Featherless vs DeepInfra compared on capacity, quantisation, scaling, failover, hardware and data location, for teams running open models in production.
| Feature | ||
|---|---|---|
| Capacity | A reserved, isolated node | GPU availability not guaranteed during scale-up |
| Quantisation | Chosen by our engineers for your model and latency target | Not supported yet on custom deployments |
| Batching and scaling | Tuned by our engineers to your traffic | You set the batch size and the minimum and maximum instances |
| Failover | Overflow and failover go to our shared pool, same API key | Extra instances you configure, if GPUs are free |
| Hardware | AMD MI325X with 256 GB per GPU. Nvidia B300, B200 and H100 when a model needs them | Nvidia, from A100 to B300 |
| Data location | EU, US or Southeast Asia | US and Canada |
| How you use it | An OpenAI-compatible endpoint, with the GPUs run for you | An OpenAI-compatible endpoint, or raw GPU instances for training and batch jobs |
New to AMD?
Each MI325X has 256 GB of memory, against 180 GB on a B200, so a 1 TB node needs only four GPUs. When a model needs Nvidia, we run it on Nvidia.
Choose DeepInfra for cheap self-serve GPUs and small models. Choose Featherless for large models that run all day, with the engineers included.
Featherless speaks the same OpenAI-compatible API as DeepInfra. Our engineers set up your model, and you change two lines to switch.
Send us your model
The model ID you call on DeepInfra today, plus your daily traffic.
We set it up
Our engineers deploy and tune it on your node for your latency target.
Change two lines
Swap DeepInfra's base URL and API key for ours.

Tell us your model, your traffic and what you pay DeepInfra today. A Featherless engineer will size your node and reply with a price.
$7,500/month
An engineer will reply to you within one business day.
Something went wrong. Please check the fields and try again.
For open models running all day, Featherless is the best-fit DeepInfra alternative: a reserved 1 TB node of four AMD MI325X GPUs for a flat $7,500 a month, run by our engineers.
No. Featherless has a $25 Chat plan for personal use, a per-token Developer plan for apps, and dedicated nodes for production. This page compares the dedicated node: $7,500 a month for 1 TB of GPU memory, fully managed by our engineers.
For large models running 24/7, yes. GLM 5.3 needs about 870 GB of GPU memory. On DeepInfra, the setup that fits it, 4x B300, costs $14,279 a month, and your team still has to run it. On Featherless, it runs on a 1 TB node for $7,500, with our engineers included.
No. DeepInfra's documentation says GPU availability is not guaranteed during scale-up. A Featherless node is reserved for you, and traffic beyond it bursts to our shared pool on the same API key.
Not yet. DeepInfra's documentation says quantisation is not currently supported on custom model deployments. On Featherless, our engineers choose the quantisation for your model and latency target.
Yes. Featherless nodes run in the EU, US or Southeast Asia, so you choose where your model and data live. DeepInfra's data centres are in the US and Canada.
DeepInfra rates are its published hourly GPU rates for dedicated deployments (billed per GPU-minute), checked 14 October 2026 and run over a 730-hour month. Featherless figures are the reserved 4x MI325X half node at $7,500 a month. Model sizes come from the Hugging Face repositories. Rates change, so check before you commit.
More comparisons
Sources