Fine-Tune Cost Lab

Scenario · 13B parameters · LoRA or QLoRA

13B LoRA fine-tune on 1 billion tokens: cost estimate

13 billion parameters, 1 billion tokens, lora or qlora. The lowest estimate across 11 GPU entries is $43 on Vultr with MI355X, 17 h of GPU time at 35% MFU. An estimate, not a quote.

Step by step

The arithmetic

  1. 1. Training FLOPs. 4 × 13 × 10^9 parameters × 1 billion tokens = 5.20 × 10^19 FLOPs. The forward pass costs about 2 x parameters x tokens and the backward pass about 2 x, because gradients for the frozen base weights are not computed. The small adapter matrices and QLoRA dequantisation are not counted.
  2. 2. Useful throughput per GPU. Dense BF16 TFLOPS × 10^12 × 35% MFU. The table gives it for each GPU.
  3. 3. GPU-hours. FLOPs ÷ throughput ÷ 3,600. For L40S (362.05 TFLOPS): 5.20 × 10^19 ÷ 1.27 × 10^14 ÷ 3,600 = 114 GPU-hours.
  4. 4. Wall-clock. GPU-hours ÷ 8 GPUs, assuming the work spreads evenly.
  5. 5. Cost. GPU-hours × each provider's lowest listed on-demand price per GPU-hour for that GPU.

Result

Estimated cost by GPU

GPUDense BF16 TFLOPSGPU-hours8 GPUsProvidersLowestMedianHighest
MI355X2500172.1 h2$43Vultr$92$142Oracle Cloud
MI300X1307.4323.9 h4$58Vultr$95$189Oracle Cloud
MI325X1307.4323.9 h2$63Vultr$92$120DigitalOcean (Paperspace)
H100 SXMpreliminary1000415.2 h6$122Thunder Compute$131$210Verda
GH200990425.2 h2$83Vultr$177$271CoreWeave
H100 PCIepreliminary800526.4 h2$129Hyperstack$139$149RunPod
L40S362.0511414 h14$63Runcrate$175$399Oracle Cloud
A100 80GB31213217 h12$144Thunder Compute$251$454Amazon Web Services
L40181.0522828 h6$180Thunder Compute$212$287Runcrate
A40149.727634 h3$163RunPod$472$733Runcrate
A1012533041 h4$330OVHcloud$636$1,057Microsoft Azure

Prices are each provider's lowest listed on-demand rate per GPU-hour, read 12 November 2026. Only GPUs whose maker prints a dense BF16 figure appear; the coverage page says which are out and why.

Sensitivity

What if MFU were different? (L40S)

MFU assumedGPU-hours8 GPUsLowest cost
20%19925 h$110
35% (default)11414 h$63
50%8010.0 h$44

The 20% and 50% rows are what-if inputs chosen to show sensitivity, not measurements. Lowest cost uses Runcrate at $0.55 per GPU-hour.

Try it

Change the assumptions

Estimate, step by step

  1. 1. Training FLOPs = 4 × 13 billion parameters × 1000 million tokens = 5.20 × 10^19
  2. 2. Useful FLOP/s per GPU = 362.05 TFLOPS × 35% MFU = 1.27 × 10^14
  3. 3. GPU-hours = step 1 ÷ step 2 ÷ 3,600 = 114
  4. 4. Wall-clock on 8 GPUs = step 3 ÷ 8 = 14 h, assuming the work spreads evenly
  5. 5. Cost = step 3 × each provider's lowest listed price per GPU-hour
ProviderBilling$/GPU-hrEstimated cost
Runcrateours, liveper second$0.55$63
CloudRiftper second$0.69$79
Massed Computebilling not stated$0.97$111
RunPodper second$1.09$124
Koyebper second$1.20$137
Civoper hour$1.29$147
Crusoeper hour$1.50$171
DigitalOcean (Paperspace)per second$1.57$179
Vultrper hour$1.67$190
OVHcloudper hour$1.80$205
Amazon Web Servicesper second$1.86$212
Verdabilling not stated$2.00$228
CoreWeavebilling not stated$2.25$256
Oracle Cloudbilling not stated$3.50$399

Range $63 to $399, median $175 across 14 providers. An estimate, not a quote: real runs differ in utilisation, memory fit, communication and restarts, and providers that bill per hour round up.

Questions

13B LoRA fine-tune on 1 billion tokens: common questions

How many FLOPs does this take?

About 5.20 × 10^19: 4 × 13 billion parameters × 1 billion tokens. The forward pass costs about 2 x parameters x tokens and the backward pass about 2 x, because gradients for the frozen base weights are not computed. The small adapter matrices and QLoRA dequantisation are not counted.

What does it cost at the low end?

$43, on Vultr with MI355X at $2.59 per GPU-hour, for 17 GPU-hours.

Is this a quote?

No. It is an estimate from a stated formula and published list prices. Real runs differ in utilisation, memory fit and restarts, and the MFU is an assumption.

Why are some GPUs missing?

A GPU needs a dense BF16 figure printed by its maker. Those that print only a sparse figure are excluded rather than halved.

Related

Disclosure

Fine-Tune Cost Lab is published by the Runcrate team, who also run Runcrate, an AI cloud. Runcrate is listed in the table, marked "ours, live". It is sorted by price like every other row, with no pinned position. Other providers' prices are read from their own public pricing pages. We have no paid placement.