Layer 2 · head to head
SambaNova SN40L vs Groq LPU
Many models on one system against one model served cheaply.
| SambaNova SN40L | Groq LPU | |
|---|---|---|
| Can you get it | Rentable by the hour from multiple clouds; purchasable at scale. | Rentable by the hour from multiple clouds; purchasable at scale. |
| Memory | 520 MiB SRAM + 64 GiB HBM + up to 1.5 TiB DDR per socket | 230 MB SRAM per chip, no HBM |
| Bandwidth | Over 1 TB/s DDR-to-HBM model streaming | 80 TB/s on-chip |
| Compute | Reconfigurable dataflow | Deterministic inference architecture |
| Power | Not published | Not published per chip |
| Interconnect | Socket-to-socket fabric | Chip-to-chip fabric |
| Software | SambaFlow | GroqCloud API, GroqWare |
| Workload | inference | inference |
SambaNova SN40L
For: Serving many large models from one system. The three-tier memory design exists to swap models in and out rather than to hold one resident.
The catch: The most unusual architecture here, so the least portable. Independently verified at 1,084 tokens/s for Llama3-8B — but on 16 sockets, which is the number that matters.
Economics: Its argument is models-per-dollar rather than tokens-per-dollar. If you serve one model, this is the wrong shape.
Groq LPU
For: Cheap, fast token generation via API. The lowest cost per million tokens among the specialist inference parts.
The catch: 230 MB per chip means the model is split across many chips — Llama2-70B at Groq's headline speed required 576 chips, roughly eight racks. The per-chip spec is misleading unless you read it as a per-cluster architecture.
Economics: Cheaper per million tokens than Cerebras while being materially slower. If your product is priced per token rather than per millisecond, that is the right trade.
Before either — can you power it?
Not published against Not published per chip. In 2026 that comparison usually matters more than the FLOPS one: the US interconnection queue exceeds 2,600 GW with waits approaching five years, and roughly 80% of projects withdraw before energising.