Overview#

What is ClusterMAX™?#

The ClusterMAX™ Rating System provides a comprehensive framework for evaluating GPU cloud providers based on critical dimensions of cloud infrastructure quality and service delivery. Our independent analysis helps you make informed decisions when selecting a GPU cloud provider.

Unlike simple performance benchmarks or cost comparisons, ClusterMAX™ evaluates the complete ecosystem of GPU cloud services, from security and compliance to orchestration capabilities and long-term reliability.

Why ClusterMAX™ Matters#

The GPU cloud market has exploded with options, making it increasingly difficult for organizations to choose the right provider. Traditional evaluation methods often focus on narrow metrics like price per GPU hour or peak performance, missing critical factors that determine real-world success.

Our Evaluation Process#

Hands-On Testing#

We deploy real workloads on each provider's infrastructure, testing everything from basic GPU performance to complex multi-node training jobs. This includes evaluating network performance, storage throughput, and system reliability under various load conditions.

Documentation Review#

We thoroughly analyze each provider's technical documentation, security certifications, SLA commitments, and compliance frameworks to understand their capabilities and limitations.

Customer Feedback#

We collect and analyze feedback from actual users across different industries and use cases, providing insights into real-world performance and support quality.

Rating Tiers#

Following an evaluation against 10 key criteria (Security, Lifecycle, Orchestration, Storage, Networking, Reliability, Monitoring, Pricing, Partnerships, and Availability) we assign one of five ratings to a given Neocloud (Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze, or Underperforming).

It is important to understand that this is a relative rating system. In other words, the quality of the services offered by each Neocloud in each of the ten criteria is assessed relative to their peers. Checking boxes against all of the itemized criteria is a good start, but it is important to note that Gold and Platinum Neoclouds rise to the top by introducing new features and functionality that others do not have, and customers appreciate.

ClusterMAX™ Platinum#

ClusterMAX™ Platinum represents the best GPU cloud providers in the industry. Providers in this category consistently excel across evaluation criteria. Platinum-tier providers are proactive, innovative, and maintain an active feedback loop with their user community to continually raise the bar. In practice, Platinum-tier providers are able to command a pricing premium over their competitors, due to a recognition that the TCO of their offering is better, even if the raw $ per GPU-hr is higher when compared directly to a competitor.

ClusterMAX™ Gold#

ClusterMAX™ Gold includes strong performance across all evaluation categories, with some opportunities for improvement. Gold-tier providers may have small gaps or inconsistencies in the user experience, but generally demonstrate responsiveness to feedback and a commitment to improvement. Gold-tier providers are a great choice, and generally win deals, especially if they have the best price per GPU-hr and the cluster is available on the customer's expected timeline.

ClusterMAX™ Silver#

ClusterMAX™ Silver is an adequate GPU cloud offering but may have noticeable gaps compared to gold or platinum-tier providers. Some users will not consider an offering from a silver tier provider due to these gaps, regardless of an attractive price per GPU-hr and good availability. In general, silver-tier GPU clouds have room for improvement and growth, and we encourage them to adopt industry best practices in order to catch up to their peers.

ClusterMAX™ Bronze#

ClusterMAX™ Bronze includes all GPU cloud providers that fulfill our minimum criteria, and is the last of the providers that we directly recommend to anyone, in any circumstance. Common issues may include inconsistent support, subpar networking performance, unclear SLAs, limited integration with popular tools like Kubernetes or Slurm, or less competitive pricing. Providers in this category need considerable improvements to enhance reliability and customer experience. Some of these providers in this category are already making considerable effort to catch up and we look forward to testing with them again soon.

Not Recommended#

Not Recommended is our last category, and the name speaks for itself. Providers in this category fail to meet our basic requirements, across one or more criteria. It is important to note that this is a broad category, so in the body of the article we describe what exactly each cloud is missing. The Not Recommended list is further broken down into two categories:

Underperforming - based on our hands-on testing, we believe that providers in this category can quickly rise to bronze or even silver if they fix one or more critical issues. Examples of critical failures include but are not limited to: no modern GPUs available (i.e. only A100, MI250X, or RTX 3090, since we expect at least H100 to be available), not having basic security attestation completed (e.g. SOC 2 Type I/II, or ISO 27001), mistakenly disabling key server features (i.e not disabling ACS, or not enabling GPUDirect RDMA), or conducting offensive business practices such as charging users for GPU hours while a cluster is being created or while servers are down due to hardware failure.

Unavailable - providers in this category have an interesting service that we are excited about, but have no way to verify as it is not available to the public or for us to test. Examples include providers that have not launched their service yet (despite marketing material that would have you thinking otherwise), providers that are completely sold-out with no plans to add new capacity, providers that exclusively serve secure government customers, or other reasons. We are excited about many of the providers in this category but maintain a "trust but verify" approach to our testing and keep them in this category until we can complete hands-on testing.

Continuous Updates#

The GPU cloud landscape evolves rapidly, with new providers entering the market and existing ones continuously improving their offerings. ClusterMAX™ ratings are updated regularly to reflect these changes, ensuring our evaluations remain current and relevant.