Decentralised Compute
Decentralised Compute evaluated across a fetchable price per GPU-hour, supply that is verified rather than self-reported, published utilisation and live availability, and recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job.
7providers tracked
7ranked (methodology v2026.11.1)
12 November 2026Ranking snapshot
3 November 2026oldest read · due 18 DecIndependent. Evidence-based.We rank with a published method and sourced evidence. No one can pay to rank.How it works
Set your country and amount to see your costs ·
Your setup
What your country changes
Pick a country to see which compute networks serve it. Nothing is hidden — any that does not is listed with that reason.- 🇺🇸 United States
- 🇨🇦 Canada
- 🇲🇽 Mexico
- 🇬🇧 United Kingdom
- 🇩🇪 Germany
- 🇫🇷 France
- 🇮🇹 Italy
- 🇪🇸 Spain
- 🇳🇱 Netherlands
- 🇨🇭 Switzerland
- 🇸🇪 Sweden
- 🇳🇴 Norway
This affects provider availability.
Prices in USD. Select your primary deposit currency.
Requirements (0)
Preferences (0)
Preferences re-weight Fit for you, which needs your country.
More filters
7 providers match your requirements
Out of 7 ranked providers. 0 excluded.
What this ranks
Ranked here: decentralised compute networks that supply the GPU capacity you need, compared on a fetchable price per GPU-hour, verified supply, utilisation and recourse if a provider vanishes.Not ranked here: anything other than a decentralised compute network that supplies GPU capacity.7 of the 7 assessed are ranked.Requirements narrow the list; they never change a published ChainChoice Score. How the ranking works
Akash Network
How Akash Network was chosen
Leads this ranking on Published Utilisation and Live AvailabilityCosmos-based compute marketplace
79 / 100 out of 100published score, #1 of all 7 worldwide
Evidence
High
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.Published Utilisation and Live AvailabilityFetchable Price Per GPU-Hour
Why it leads
- Akash Network is 4 points ahead of Nosana, mainly because it scores higher on its dc utilisation disclosure and its dc supply verification.
- Best in this ranking on dc supply verification and dc utilisation disclosure
- Ahead of Nosana on dc utilisation disclosure (+2.5 points) and dc supply verification (+1.9 points)
Tradeoff
Dc price transparency: 1 point below the best in this ranking
Usage price
$2.04/unit
Share
#ProviderUsage priceCompare
2
Solana GPU marketplace publishing per-model...
75 / 100 out of 100
$1.5/unitfee read 3 November 2026 · source
6
Original 2016 compute marketplace
53 / 100 out of 100
7
GPU rendering network priced in OctaneBench-hour...
52 / 100 out of 100
Compare providers (0)
See key differences in features, fees, security and more.
Dc price transparency
Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour
30% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Dc price transparency (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Nosana | 8 | 75 |
| Akash Network | 7 | 79 |
| io.net | 5 | 62 |
| Fluence | 5 | 59 |
| Aethir | 4 | 55 |
| Render Network | 3 | 52 |
| Golem Network | 1 | 53 |
Dc supply verification
Verified vs Self-Reported Supply
30% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Dc supply verification (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Akash Network | 7 | 79 |
| Nosana | 6 | 75 |
| io.net | 4 | 62 |
| Fluence | 3 | 59 |
| Golem Network | 3 | 53 |
| Aethir | 2 | 55 |
| Render Network | 2 | 52 |
Dc failure recourse
Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job
20% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Dc failure recourse (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Aethir | 4 | 55 |
| Akash Network | 3 | 79 |
| Fluence | 3 | 59 |
| Golem Network | 3 | 53 |
| Render Network | 3 | 52 |
| Nosana | 2 | 75 |
| io.net | 2 | 62 |
Dc utilisation disclosure
Published Utilisation and Live Availability
20% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.
| Provider | Dc utilisation disclosure (0–10) | ChainChoice Score |
|---|---|---|
| Akash Network | 9 | 79 |
| Nosana | 7 | 75 |
| io.net | 4 | 62 |
| Golem Network | 3 | 53 |
| Fluence | 2 | 59 |
| Aethir | 1 | 55 |
| Render Network | 1 | 52 |
All 4 published criteria
Every ranked row’s score on each criterion, in the published order. Choose a column to order by it.
| Provider | ChainChoice Score | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Akash Network | 7 | 7 | 9 | 3 | 79 |
| 2 | Nosana | 8 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 75 |
| 3 | io.net | 5 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 62 |
| 4 | Fluence | 5 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 59 |
| 5 | Aethir | 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 55 |
| 6 | Golem Network | 1 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 53 |
| 7 | Render Network | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 52 |
How this ranking works
How firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and which decentralised compute were assessed and left out.
FirmThis verdict holds under every one-point re-read
See the arithmetic
Every published criterion was moved up and down by one point and the ranking re-run. The same product came first each time. The published rankings file
Why this score4 published criteria · leads 2 of 4
Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap/10 out of 10Pts
Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour7.2−176.7
Verified vs Self-Reported Supply7.2·76.7
Published Utilisation and Live Availability4.8·95.8
Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job4.8−131.9
Σ methodology points21.1/32
Each bar is the score on that criterion’s own 0–10 scale, never rescaled to the pool. The dark line is the best any product here reached on that axis. Wt is the most the criterion can add to the 86-point weighted total. Pts is weight × score × 32; the sum is the methodology score, and each weighted point behind the leader costs 2.6 on the displayed score. how these are weighted
Why it ranks first
Why Akash Network leads this category right now
Cosmos-based compute marketplace; live GPU prices and inventory via public API. Strongest on published utilisation and live availability (9/10): Akash's public console API lists live allocated-versus-allocatable counts per GPU model and network-wide (424 GPUs, 319 allocated; H100 45 of 69 allocated), checkable before committing. Two small models show more allocated than allocatable (RTX 4090 7 of 4). Weakest on recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job (3/10): Akash documents that a provider can close a lease and that unused escrow then returns to the renter. It publishes no network uptime percentage and no service credits; the 99.9% uptime figure in its docs is an example provider attribute, not a network commitment. Published price: Live from Akash's own console API, /v1/gpu-prices (fetched 3 Nov 2026, 14:14 UTC; a live feed of provider bids that moves between fetches), USD per GPU-hour: h100 80Gi SXM5 "min":2.04,"max":3.16,"avg":2.58,"weightedAverage":2.73,"med":2.56 (4 providers, 69…
Best for
Published Utilisation and Live Availability — 9/10
Main tradeoff
The entire network was 426 GPUs at the 15 September 2026 read, and H100 capacity is 69 cards held by four providers. One operator withdrawing is a double-digit-percent capacity event, and there is no reservation or queue mechanism to protect an in-flight workload. Rates are bands of provider bids (h100 $2.04–$3.16/hr), not one firm rate.
Verify before signup
Live from Akash's own console API, /v1/gpu-prices (fetched 3 Nov 2026, 14:14 UTC; a live feed of provider bids that moves between fetches), USD per GPU-hour: h100 80Gi SXM5 "min":2.04,"max":3.16,"avg":2.58,"weightedAverage":2.73,"med":2.56 (4 providers, 69 cards / 25 available); a100 80Gi SXM4 "min":1.07,"max":1.91 with "med":1.49 (200 cards / 35 available); pro6000se 96Gi "min":1.52,"max":2.09 (81 cards / 25 available); rtx4090 24Gi "min":0.36 (4 cards / 0 available); rtx5090 32Gi "min":0.57; b300 288Gi listed at "min":0.23 with 16 cards / 0 available. No h200 entry in the feed. 24 NVIDIA model entries, two (gtx1050ti, rtx3090ti) with "price":null. Network-wide "total":424,"available":114 (arithmetic: (424 - 114) / 424 = about 73% leased). No plan or monthly fee is published; deployments docs: "Provider is automatically paid per block from escrow in ACT".
Recommendation summary
What should decide this category
How long does a single job run, and can it restart if a provider drops out?
Do you need a specific GPU class, and is it actually available today?
What recourse do you have if a supplier vanishes mid-job?
Quick picks
Strong options in this category
Start with the lead choice first, then use the shortlist only if you still need a challenger or stronger fit for a specific setup.
Best overall
Akash Network
Cosmos-based compute marketplace; live GPU prices and inventory via public API
Cosmos-based compute marketplace; live GPU prices and inventory via public API. Strongest on published utilisation and live availability (9/10): Akash's public console API lists live allocated-versus-allocatable counts per GPU model and network-wide (424 GPUs, 319 allocated; H100 45 of 69 allocated), checkable before committing. Two small models show more allocated than allocatable (RTX 4090 7 of 4). Weakest on recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job (3/10): Akash documents that a provider can close a lease and that unused escrow then returns to the renter. It publishes no network uptime percentage and no service credits; the 99.9% uptime figure in its docs is an example provider attribute, not a network commitment. Published price: Live from Akash's own console API, /v1/gpu-prices (fetched 3 Nov 2026, 14:14 UTC; a live feed of provider bids that moves between fetches), USD per GPU-hour: h100 80Gi SXM5 "min":2.04,"max":3.16,"avg":2.58,"weightedAverage":2.73,"med":2.56 (4 providers, 69…
Best for: Published Utilisation and Live Availability — 9/10
Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour · weight 30%7/10Verified vs Self-Reported Supply · weight 30%7/10Published Utilisation and Live Availability · weight 20%9/10Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job · weight 20%3/10
Quick pick
Nosana
Solana GPU marketplace publishing per-model prices and live host availability
Solana GPU marketplace publishing per-model prices and live host availability. Strongest on fetchable price per GPU-hour (8/10): Nosana's homepage lists firm USD hourly rates for 22 named GPU models without a login, such as NVIDIA 4090 at $0.400/h and H100 at $1.500/h. Several listed models, the H100 among them, show no host available at the listed rate. Weakest on recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job (2/10): Nosana's Terms provide the services 'AS IS' and 'AS AVAILABLE', used at the customer's own risk. They state no uptime percentage, no service credit and no documented outcome for a job when a host drops it. Published price: Public pricing table on nosana.com (fetched 3 Nov 2026): "NVIDIA H100 Price: $1.500/h Availability: 0 / 0 hosts"; "NVIDIA A100 80GB Price: $0.900/h Availability: 0 / 13 hosts"; "NVIDIA 5090 Price: $0.500/h Availability: 11 / 46 hosts"; "NVIDIA 4090 Price:…
Best for: Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour — 8/10
Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour · weight 30%8/10Verified vs Self-Reported Supply · weight 30%6/10Published Utilisation and Live Availability · weight 20%7/10Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job · weight 20%2/10
Quick pick
io.net
Solana GPU aggregator; public explorer shows per-model counts, hired vs idle and prices
Solana GPU aggregator; public explorer shows per-model counts, hired vs idle and prices. Strongest on fetchable price per GPU-hour (5/10): io.net's explorer lists firm per-model rates without a login (H100 80GB HBM3 from $1.19/hr), but its own pages disagree on the H100 floor: $2.19/hr on the homepage and $1.80-2.50/hr in its pricing guide. Its terms say cluster pricing 'is not fixed'. Weakest on recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job (2/10): io.net's terms state that all charges are final and non-refundable, that unused prepaid time is forfeited when a cluster is suspended or terminated, and that the sole remedy for dissatisfaction is to stop using the services. No uptime percentage or credit is published. Published price: io.net's own pricing guide (fetched 3 Nov 2026; table still dated "February 2026"): H100 80GB "io.net Decentralized $1.80-2.50/hr Auction Per minute"; A100 80GB "$0.80-1.40/hr"; RTX 4090 "$0.20-0.35/hr"; L40S "$0.90-1.30/hr"; for H100, AWS "$6.88/hr", Azure…
Best for: Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour — 5/10
Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour · weight 30%5/10Verified vs Self-Reported Supply · weight 30%4/10Published Utilisation and Live Availability · weight 20%4/10Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job · weight 20%2/10
Quick pick
FL
Fluence
CPU cloud that added GPU containers October 2025; publishes named comparisons
CPU cloud that added GPU containers October 2025; publishes named comparisons. Strongest on fetchable price per GPU-hour (5/10): Fluence publishes one firm on-demand rate, NVIDIA H200 at $2.80/hr; other on-demand models sit behind the signed-in console. Its auction site lists entry rates per GPU-hour but gives North America both 'from $2.76/hr' and 'from $3.71 /GPU-hr'. Weakest on published utilisation and live availability (2/10): Fluence's auction site shows available equal to total in every region (6,212 of 6,212 GPUs in North America), so it discloses no leased share and no live utilisation per GPU model. Published price: fluence.ai homepage (fetched 3 Nov 2026): "NVIDIA H200 GPU Fluence $2.80/hr CoreWeave $6.30/hr AWS Cloud $7.90/hr Google Cloud $10.84/hr" (the /gpu-cloud page shows the same four figures).
Best for: Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour — 5/10
Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour · weight 30%5/10Verified vs Self-Reported Supply · weight 30%3/10Published Utilisation and Live Availability · weight 20%2/10Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job · weight 20%3/10
Considered and not ranked
None left out by name
We assessed 7 products here and rank all 7. No product has been turned away by name; when one is, its name and the reason appear here. Evidence last read 3 November 2026.
What this ranking does not assess
- Liveness failure: the operator stops, censors you or loses data.
- Exit failure: you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.
These can still cost you money here; the ranking does not measure them, so a high place says nothing about them. Which criterion scores each family, and why the others do not apply, is in /data/risk-coverage.json.
How this ranking is built
Reviewed on a fetchable price per GPU-hour, supply verified against the network's own API, published utilisation, and recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job.
Data checked Nov 2026 · Independent rankings · We show our work
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means every product ranked on this page was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
Direct answer
What is the best compute network in 2026?
Akash Network ranks #1 overall for decentralised compute on ChainChoice. Cosmos-based compute marketplace; live GPU prices and inventory via public API. It holds that rank under an affiliate-blind methodology scored across 4 published, weighted criteria — the code that ranks providers physically cannot read affiliate payouts (CI-enforced), so a payout can't move a rank. The verdict re-computes on every fee change, incident, or regulatory action; the full reasoning and the audit receipt are under Methodology.
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Recourse When a Provider Vanishes Mid-Job · 20% (Akash Network 3/10, Nosana 2/10, io.net 2/10)
- Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by Verified vs Self-Reported Supply · 30% (Akash Network 7/10, Nosana 6/10, io.net 4/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Liveness failure, Exit failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.
Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Fetchable Price Per GPU-Hour (30%), Published Utilisation and Live Availability (20%).
FAQs
3 questions readers ask before choosing decentralised compute.
Frequently asked
Questions people ask before choosing compute
Why are advertised node counts not scored?
Because they are self-reported, and this category has a documented history of inflated supply. What is scored is the number the network's own API returns today, against the price you can fetch for it.
Is idle capacity the same as available capacity?
No. A large fleet sitting mostly idle can still be unavailable in the GPU class you need, which is why published utilisation is scored separately from raw supply.
What happens when a permissionless supplier disappears?
That is the criterion. A permissionless marketplace has no SLA behind an individual supplier, so what matters is whether the network re-schedules your job, refunds you, or leaves you to notice.
Free advisor·No signup needed
Still unsure? Get your best compute pick
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — then review the evidence before deciding.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Best picks
Best decentralised compute in 2026
The best compute network depends on whether you can get a price at all. Start with the two things this page scores hardest: can you fetch a price per GPU-hour without a sales call, and is the advertised supply verified or self-reported. Utilisation matters next — a large fleet sitting mostly idle can still be unavailable in the GPU class you need — and last, what recourse you have when a provider vanishes mid-job, which is the failure this market actually produces.
Best overall
Akash Network
Cosmos-based compute marketplace; live GPU prices and inventory via public API
Data checked Nov 2026
Cosmos-based compute marketplace; live GPU prices and inventory via public API. Strongest on published utilisation and live availability (9/10): Akash's public console API lists live allocated-versus-allocatable counts per GPU model and network-wide (424 GPUs, 319 allocated; H100 45 of 69 allocated), checkable before committing. Two small models show more allocated than allocatable (RTX 4090 7 of 4). Weakest on recourse when a provider vanishes mid-job (3/10): Akash documents that a provider can close a lease and that unused escrow then returns to the renter. It publishes no network uptime percentage and no service credits; the 99.9% uptime figure in its docs is an example provider attribute, not a network commitment. Published price: Live from Akash's own console API, /v1/gpu-prices (fetched 3 Nov 2026, 14:14 UTC; a live feed of provider bids that moves between fetches), USD per GPU-hour: h100 80Gi SXM5 "min":2.04,"max":3.16,"avg":2.58,"weightedAverage":2.73,"med":2.56 (4 providers, 69…
Best for: Published Utilisation and Live Availability — 9/10
Browse this network
MS
Written and reviewed by Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research