Fine-Tune Cost Lab

Scenario · 7B parameters · Full fine-tune

7B full fine-tune on 100 million tokens: cost estimate

7 billion parameters, 100 million tokens, full fine-tune. The lowest estimate across 11 GPU entries is $3.45 on Vultr with MI355X, 1.3 h of GPU time at 35% MFU. An estimate, not a quote.

Step by step

The arithmetic

  1. 1. Training FLOPs. 6 × 7 × 10^9 parameters × 100 million tokens = 4.20 × 10^18 FLOPs. About 2 x parameters x tokens for the forward pass plus about 4 x for the backward pass, because the backward pass computes gradients for activations and for every weight.
  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): 4.20 × 10^18 ÷ 1.27 × 10^14 ÷ 3,600 = 9.21 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
MI355X25001.3310 min2$3.45Vultr$7.46$11Oracle Cloud
MI300X1307.42.5519 min4$4.72Vultr$7.70$15Oracle Cloud
MI325X1307.42.5519 min2$5.10Vultr$7.39$9.69DigitalOcean (Paperspace)
H100 SXMpreliminary10003.3325 min6$9.83Thunder Compute$11$17Verda
GH2009903.3725 min2$6.70Vultr$14$22CoreWeave
H100 PCIepreliminary8004.1731 min2$10Hyperstack$11$12RunPod
L40S362.059.211.2 h14$5.06Runcrate$14$32Oracle Cloud
A100 80GB312111.3 h12$12Thunder Compute$20$37Amazon Web Services
L40181.05182.3 h6$15Thunder Compute$17$23Runcrate
A40149.7222.8 h3$13RunPod$38$59Runcrate
A10125273.3 h4$27OVHcloud$51$85Microsoft 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%162.0 h$8.86
35% (default)9.211.2 h$5.06
50%6.4448 min$3.54

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 = 6 × 7 billion parameters × 100 million tokens = 4.20 × 10^18
  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 = 9.2
  4. 4. Wall-clock on 8 GPUs = step 3 ÷ 8 = 1.2 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$5.06
CloudRiftper second$0.69$6.35
Massed Computebilling not stated$0.97$8.93
RunPodper second$1.09$10
Koyebper second$1.20$11
Civoper hour$1.29$12
Crusoeper hour$1.50$14
DigitalOcean (Paperspace)per second$1.57$14
Vultrper hour$1.67$15
OVHcloudper hour$1.80$17
Amazon Web Servicesper second$1.86$17
Verdabilling not stated$2.00$18
CoreWeavebilling not stated$2.25$21
Oracle Cloudbilling not stated$3.50$32

Range $5.06 to $32, median $14 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

7B full fine-tune on 100 million tokens: common questions

How many FLOPs does this take?

About 4.20 × 10^18: 6 × 7 billion parameters × 100 million tokens. About 2 x parameters x tokens for the forward pass plus about 4 x for the backward pass, because the backward pass computes gradients for activations and for every weight.

What does it cost at the low end?

$3.45, on Vultr with MI355X at $2.59 per GPU-hour, for 1.3 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.