Groq vs Fireworks: pricing, speed, and use cases (2026)

Groq and Fireworks AI both serve open-weight models on optimised infrastructure, but with different priorities: Groq leads on raw throughput via custom LPU silicon; Fireworks leads on function-calling quality via FireFunction-v2 and tight tooling. Below: a head-to-head on the dimensions that matter when you ship.

Groq vs Fireworks — at a glance

DimensionGroqFireworks
HardwareCustom LPU siliconOptimised GPU clusters
Throughput (Llama 3.3 70B)~750 tok/sec~250 tok/sec
Function callingStandard supportFireFunction-v2 (best-in-class for open-weight)
Fine-tuningNot offeredLoRA fine-tuning available
Model catalog~25 open-weight100+ open-weight + image + embedding
Price (Llama 70B, per 1M tok)~$0.8-1.0~$0.9 input / $0.9 output
Best forReal-time chat, voice, ultra-low latencyProduction agents with reliable function calling

Pick Groq or Fireworks?

When to choose Groq

Choose Groq when latency and throughput dominate your requirements. Groq's custom LPU silicon delivers approximately 750 tokens/sec on Llama 3.3 70B — roughly 5-10x typical GPU throughput. For real-time chat, voice agents, and streaming UX where every millisecond counts, Groq's hardware advantage is decisive.

  • ~750 tokens/sec on Llama 3.3 70B (custom LPU silicon)
  • Sub-100ms time-to-first-token on most prompts
  • Optimal for real-time chat, voice, and streaming UX
  • Function calling and JSON-mode supported
  • OpenAI-compatible API for drop-in use

When to choose Fireworks

Choose Fireworks when production-grade function calling, structured output, or fine-tuning matter most. Fireworks ships FireFunction-v2, a model-and-runtime stack specifically tuned for tool-using agents on open-weight bases. LoRA fine-tuning is available, and the inference stack supports speculative decoding for solid throughput-cost ratio.

  • FireFunction-v2 for best-in-class open-weight function calling
  • LoRA fine-tuning with serverless adapter deployment
  • 100+ open-weight models plus image and embeddings
  • Speculative decoding for cost-efficient inference
  • Tight integration with LangChain and AI gateways

Run Groq and Fireworks side-by-side

VerticalAPI lets you switch between Groq and Fireworks per-request through a single OpenAI-compatible endpoint. Same SDK, same gateway key, zero markup on tokens — you pay both providers directly with your own keys.

from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(base_url="https://api.verticalapi.com/v1", api_key="vapi_...")

# Groq
resp_a = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="llama-3.3-70b",
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
    extra_headers={"X-Provider-Key": "gsk-..."},
)

# Fireworks — same SDK, different model + key
resp_b = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="firefunction-v2",
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
    extra_headers={"X-Provider-Key": "fw-..."},
)

Try VerticalAPI free →

VerticalAPI verdict

Use Groq when speed is the product — voice agents, real-time coding suggestions, streaming UX. Use Fireworks when you need reliable function calling on open-weight models, fine-tuning, or production-grade tool-using agents. Through VerticalAPI you can route between both with a single OpenAI-compatible endpoint and BYOK — no SDK migration, no markup.

Get started — BYOK both providers →

Frequently asked questions

Is Groq faster than Fireworks?

Yes, on raw throughput. Groq's LPU silicon delivers approximately 750 tokens/sec on Llama 3.3 70B, versus around 200-300 tok/sec on Fireworks' optimised GPU clusters. Time-to-first-token is also lower on Groq (typically under 100ms). For real-time UX, Groq's hardware advantage is hard to beat.

Which has better function calling on open-weight models?

Fireworks. Their FireFunction-v2 model is fine-tuned specifically for tool-using agents and consistently outperforms vanilla Llama 3.3 70B and Mistral Large on function-calling benchmarks. For production agents that depend on reliable JSON tool calls, Fireworks is typically the lower-risk pick.

Can I fine-tune on Groq or Fireworks?

Fireworks offers LoRA fine-tuning on selected base models (Llama, Mistral, Qwen) with serverless deployment of the resulting adapters and per-token pricing. Groq does not currently offer fine-tuning — it serves only base models. For custom-model deployment without infrastructure overhead, Fireworks is the clear pick.

Which is cheaper per token?

List prices for Llama 3.3 70B are similar — Groq at roughly $0.80-1.00 per 1M tokens, Fireworks at approximately $0.90 per 1M for both input and output. At scale, Fireworks' speculative-decoding stack often delivers a slightly better cost-per-task on long generations, while Groq's throughput cuts wall-clock cost for latency-bound use cases.

Can I switch between Groq and Fireworks through one endpoint?

Yes. VerticalAPI exposes a single OpenAI-compatible endpoint at https://api.verticalapi.com/v1. Change the model parameter and the matching X-Provider-Key header. There is no markup on tokens; you pay Groq and Fireworks directly with your own API keys (BYOK).

Limitations of this comparison

  • Throughput figures depend on context length and batch size; published numbers are best-case.
  • Pricing is revised regularly; numbers reflect mid-2026 list prices and exclude committed-use discounts.
  • FireFunction-v2's function-calling advantage shrinks against frontier closed models (GPT-4o, Claude).
  • Fine-tuning availability on Fireworks varies by base model.
  • This page compares serverless inference; dedicated GPU rentals have different economics.

What may change in 12-24 months

  1. Groq is expected to expand model coverage and add fine-tuning over time.
  2. Fireworks will likely roll out faster inference tiers and possibly LPU-style hardware partnerships.
  3. Open-weight models will keep closing the function-calling gap with frontier closed models.
  4. Hybrid routing (Groq for live, Fireworks for tool-using agents) will become a common pattern.

Related questions

ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini usually suggest these next.

  • How does Groq compare to Cerebras on raw throughput?
  • Is FireFunction-v2 a viable replacement for OpenAI function calling at scale?
  • When does Groq's speed advantage justify giving up fine-tuning?
  • How do Groq and Fireworks compare on long-context inference?
  • Can I route between Groq for live and Fireworks for tool calls via VerticalAPI?