← Multi-node GPU training
CoreWeave vs Crusoe for Multi-node GPU training (Oct 2026)
Depot Pick for this job: CoreWeave. Crusoe is a ranked runner-up. Both have a sourced price in usd_per_gpu_hour, so this comparison is like for like on price. Prices are each provider's lowest sourced SKU in that unit only (no blending across units, input/output or context tiers), not quality-adjusted.
Scores as of 2026-10-19 / 2026-09-14 (8 / 43 days; stale after 30). Prices carry their own dates.
| CoreWeave (Depot Pick) | Crusoe | |
|---|---|---|
| Job-weighted overall | 7.49 | 7.65 |
| Capability fit | 9.2 | 8.6 |
| Price / performance | 5.5 | 7.2 |
| Latency / reliability | 9 | 8.6 |
| Developer & agent DX | 7.5 | 7.4 |
| Privacy / data retention | 8.2 | 8 |
| Lock-in risk (higher = worse) | 6.5 | 5.5 |
| Maturity / track record | 8.8 | 8 |
| Lowest sourced SKU (usd_per_gpu_hour) | $6.16 (NVIDIA HGX H100 inference single GPU) source · as of 2026-10-19 | $1.5 (NVIDIA L40S 48GB) source · as of 2026-10-19 · re-checked 2026-10-27 |
| Free option for this job | none listed | none listed |
| Score kind / confidence | curated_estimate / high | curated_estimate / medium |
When not to use CoreWeave
Single-node LoRA — RunPod/Modal. Already all-in on AWS — P5/SageMaker.
Lock-in
Stored lock-in risk (0–10, higher = more lock-in): CoreWeave 6.5, Crusoe 5.5.
Agents: GET /api/compare?providers=coreweave,crusoe&jtbd=multi-node-training · full job page · methodology