Groq AI · LPU Performance

Groq AI vs CPU Performance Difference: Why CPUs Cannot Run LLMs Fast

PL
Prashant Lalwani 2026-04-19 · 12 min read
Groq AI Groq AI
PERFORMANCE COMPARISON — Llama 3.1 70B · tokens/second Groq LPU 800 tok/s H100 GPU 200 A100 GPU 80 RTX 4090 120 Apple M3 Max 20 Intel i9 CPU 2–4 CPU is 200–400x slower than Groq. For production LLM inference, CPU is not viable.

Running a 70B parameter LLM on a CPU produces 1–5 tokens per second — responses so slow they are unusable. Groq produces 750+ tokens/second. Here is why the difference is so extreme and what it means for AI deployment.

Quick Access: Get a free Groq API key at console.groq.com/keys — no credit card needed. Starts with gsk_.... 14,400 free requests per day.

Why CPUs Are So Slow at AI Inference

CPUs are general-purpose processors designed for sequential, low-latency single-threaded tasks. They have a small number of very powerful cores (typically 8–64) optimised for tasks like running your operating system, web browser, and application logic.

LLM inference requires a fundamentally different workload: massive parallel matrix multiplication across billions of parameters. A CPU doing this is like trying to fill a swimming pool with a kitchen tap. The water eventually gets there, but it is the wrong tool.

The Parallel Processing Gap

ProcessorCores/UnitsLlama 70B SpeedUse Case
Intel i9-14900K (CPU)24 cores1–3 tok/sGeneral computing
Apple M3 Max (CPU+GPU)40 GPU cores10–20 tok/sLocal AI, limited
NVIDIA RTX 4090 (GPU)16,384 CUDA cores60–100 tok/sGaming, local AI
NVIDIA H100 (GPU)16,896 CUDA cores150–200 tok/sCloud AI inference
Groq LPUSpecialised matrix units750–820 tok/sLLM inference

Memory Bandwidth: The Real Bottleneck

The CPU's core problem for AI is memory bandwidth. A 70B parameter model in 4-bit quantisation is ~35GB of data. Every token generation requires reading large portions of this data.

CPU memory bandwidth: ~50–100 GB/s. GPU HBM bandwidth: 2–3 TB/s. Groq on-chip SRAM: effectively unlimited bottleneck (data is already inside the processor). This is why even a powerful CPU is 100–500x slower than Groq for LLM inference.

When Running on CPU Makes Sense

Despite the speed limitations, CPU-based LLM inference is not useless:

For these scenarios, tools like llama.cpp, Ollama, and LM Studio make CPU inference practical.

The Right Hardware for Each Workload

The key insight: do not try to run production LLM inference on CPUs. The performance penalty (100–500x slower than Groq) makes it commercially unviable for any user-facing application.

Tools Referenced in This Article

Related Reading: Explore all our Groq AI articles on the NeuraPulse blog — covering LPU architecture, benchmarks, use cases, and developer guides.