Fine-Tune Cost Lab

Scenario · 70B parameters · LoRA or QLoRA

70B LoRA fine-tune on 100 million tokens: cost estimate

70 billion parameters, 100 million tokens, lora or qlora. The lowest estimate across 11 GPU entries is $23 on Vultr with MI355X, 8.9 h of GPU time at 35% MFU. An estimate, not a quote.

Step by step

The arithmetic

  1. 1. Training FLOPs. 4 × 70 × 10^9 parameters × 100 million tokens = 2.80 × 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): 2.80 × 10^19 ÷ 1.27 × 10^14 ÷ 3,600 = 61 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
MI355X25008.891.1 h2$23Vultr$50$76Oracle Cloud
MI300X1307.4172.1 h4$31Vultr$51$102Oracle Cloud
MI325X1307.4172.1 h2$34Vultr$49$65DigitalOcean (Paperspace)
H100 SXMpreliminary1000222.8 h6$66Thunder Compute$70$113Verda
GH200990222.8 h2$45Vultr$95$146CoreWeave
H100 PCIepreliminary800283.5 h2$69Hyperstack$75$80RunPod
L40S362.05617.7 h14$34Runcrate$94$215Oracle Cloud
A100 80GB312718.9 h12$78Thunder Compute$135$244Amazon Web Services
L40181.0512315 h6$97Thunder Compute$114$155Runcrate
A40149.714819 h3$88RunPod$254$395Runcrate
A1012517822 h4$178OVHcloud$342$569Microsoft 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%10713 h$59
35% (default)617.7 h$34
50%435.4 h$24

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 × 70 billion parameters × 100 million tokens = 2.80 × 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 = 61.4
  4. 4. Wall-clock on 8 GPUs = step 3 ÷ 8 = 7.7 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$34
CloudRiftper second$0.69$42
Massed Computebilling not stated$0.97$60
RunPodper second$1.09$67
Koyebper second$1.20$74
Civoper hour$1.29$79
Crusoeper hour$1.50$92
DigitalOcean (Paperspace)per second$1.57$96
Vultrper hour$1.67$103
OVHcloudper hour$1.80$110
Amazon Web Servicesper second$1.86$114
Verdabilling not stated$2.00$123
CoreWeavebilling not stated$2.25$138
Oracle Cloudbilling not stated$3.50$215

Range $34 to $215, median $94 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

70B LoRA fine-tune on 100 million tokens: common questions

How many FLOPs does this take?

About 2.80 × 10^19: 4 × 70 billion parameters × 100 million 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?

$23, on Vultr with MI355X at $2.59 per GPU-hour, for 8.9 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.