Cheatsheet 12 — API Provider Comparison
How to compare LLM API providers (not just models). Full: Phase 5, Phase 8.
The comparison axes
| Axis | What to check |
|---|---|
| Models offered | Which models + versions; frontier vs open |
| Price | $/Mtok input + output (output usually pricier); caching discounts |
| Context / max output | Limits per model per provider |
| Latency | TTFT + TPOT under load (varies by provider for the same model) |
| Rate limits | RPM/TPM; how to raise them |
| Capabilities | Tool calling, structured output, vision, reasoning, batch API |
| Data policy | Train on your data? retention? ZDR? DPA/BAA? region/residency (Phase 14.02) |
| Reliability | Uptime/SLA, incident history, status page |
| SDK / API shape | OpenAI-compatible? streaming? |
The big providers (capabilities move fast — verify on models.dev)
| Provider | Strength | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| OpenAI | Broad frontier + tooling, ecosystem | The de-facto API shape |
| Anthropic (Claude) | Strong reasoning/coding, long context, safety | No-train business default |
| Google (Gemini) | Long context, multimodal, price | Vertex for enterprise/residency |
| Meta (Llama) | Open weights (self-host or via providers) | Run anywhere |
| Mistral | Open + API, efficient | EU option |
| Aggregators (OpenRouter) | One API → many models/providers | Routing/fallback built in (Phase 8.01) |
| Inference clouds (Together, Fireworks, Groq…) | Fast/cheap open-model serving | Speed/price for open weights |
Same model, different providers
A model (e.g., Llama-3.1-70B) is served by many providers at different price/latency/limits. This is the "model × provider" matrix that gateways exploit (Phase 8.04). Don't compare models — compare (model, provider) pairs.
Decision checklist
- Does it have the model + capabilities I need (tool calling, context, vision)?
- Price per resolved task at my volume (Phase 15.05)?
- p95 latency under load (test it)?
- Data policy OK (no-train + DPA + residency for my data)?
- Rate limits + reliability sufficient?
- OpenAI-compatible (easy to swap/route)?
Pro move
Don't lock to one provider — put a gateway in front (provider adapters + routing + fallback, Phase 8) so you can route by price/latency/availability and survive a provider outage.
Next: 13 — Model Gateway Architecture · Full: Phase 8