vs
Groq vs Runware
Runware is a low-cost media generation API across image, video, audio and 3D. Groq is a fast text host. They do different jobs in the same app.
By The Subconscious Team · Updated
Groq vs Runware: key differences
Runware and Groq share almost no workloads. Runware sells image, video, audio and 3D generation behind one request schema, with 300+ priced models, images from fractions of a cent and Seedance 2.5 video at about $0.10 a second at 480p. It runs a custom Sonic Inference Engine and rents raw H100s at $2.76 an hour. Groq serves open text models and Whisper on its LPU. Runware's own downside notes that LLM hosting is a side line, so text belongs elsewhere, and Groq is one candidate for that text layer.
In a consumer app the split is natural. Groq could handle a fast chat or voice turn that writes the prompt, and Runware could produce the image or clip. Runware supports fine-tuned diffusion checkpoints and batching many tasks in one call. Groq hosts no custom models of any kind. Runware's output URLs expire after seven days by default, so the app needs its own storage. Groq's outputs are just text, returned at hundreds of tokens per second.
What Groq and Runware do
Groq
Groq serves open models on its own chip, the LPU, which keeps model weights in on-chip SRAM and runs a deterministic schedule instead of waiting on GPU memory. Groq publishes 1,000 tokens per second on GPT-OSS 20B and 500 on GPT-OSS 120B. Latency stays tight between median and tail, which matters for strict SLAs. The API is OpenAI-compatible and also hosts Whisper for speech to text plus an agentic system called Groq Compound with built-in search and code execution.
Example models: GPT-OSS 120B, Qwen 3.6 27B
Full Groq profileRunware
Runware sells what it calls the lowest-cost API for media generation, and it claims more than 1M developers. One endpoint covers image, video, audio, 3D and text. Every request is a task with the same shape, so switching from a Kling video to a Seedream image mostly means changing the model ID. The published rate sheet lists 300+ priced models, with images from fractions of a cent to a few cents each and video billed per second, like Seedance 2.5 at about $0.10 a second at 480p.
Example models: Seedance 2.5, Qwen-Image-3.0
Full Runware profileShould you choose Groq or Runware?
Groq vs Runware at a glance
| Attribute | Groq | Runware |
|---|---|---|
| Model access | Open weights | Hosted media models |
| Flagship models | GPT-OSS 120B, Qwen 3.6 27B | Seedance 2.5, Qwen-Image-3.0 |
| Speed | 500–1,000 tok/s | Unknown |
| Price | Near the floor on small models | Images from fractions of a cent |
| Customization | No fine-tuned model hosting | Fine-tuned diffusion checkpoints |
| Deployment | GroqCloud API | Unified API, raw GPUs |
| Long context | Around 131K max | Not applicable |
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between Groq and Runware?
Runware is a low-cost media generation API across image, video, audio and 3D. Groq is a fast text host. They do different jobs in the same app.
When should I choose Groq over Runware?
Fast text and voice turns in a consumer app; Prompt writing ahead of media generation; Speech to text through Whisper.
When should I choose Runware over Groq?
High-volume image and short video generation; Fine-tuned diffusion models at scale; One schema across image, video, audio and 3D.
Is Groq or Runware cheaper?
Groq: Near the floor on small models. Runware: Images from fractions of a cent. The cheaper choice depends on the model and workload.
Which has more context, Groq or Runware?
Groq: Around 131K max. Runware: Not applicable.
Related comparisons
Running long-horizon agents?
If your agents run past 200K tokens, compare both against Subconscious. Our inference stack treats a long-horizon trace as the primary workload, so speed, cost, and accuracy hold up deep into the trace.