Comparison
Frontière AI vs Groq: the EU-sovereign alternative to custom-hardware inference
Groq and Frontière AI target different sides of the same equation, and on speed Groq usually wins. Groq LLC is a US company based in Mountain View, California, that designed its own inference chip, the LPU (Language Processing Unit), and offers a free plan for developers. Groq does not publish a per-token price for Llama 3.3 70B (its model list says “Contact sales”), so we compare on GPT-OSS 120B, which both of us serve: Groq publishes €0.13 ($0.15) per million input tokens before tax, against our €0.252 VAT included. Excluding VAT on both sides (Frontière AI: €0.21 in / €0.84 out per million), on this model Groq is cheaper on both input and output. What custom silicon does not change is which government can compel the company behind it: a US group answers to a US court order under the CLOUD Act, wherever the inference physically runs — even when, as Groq's European customers do, you contract with its UK entity under English law. Frontière AI is a French company: its 18 sovereign models run at EU providers with no non-EU capital control, the others are labeled fast access (US) before you call them, and it stores no prompts at all. If raw speed is your only criterion, use Groq. If you have to answer for where your data can be compelled, that is a question about corporate control, and it is the one we are built around.
Side by side
Every row below comes from the other side's own published pages, checked on 2026-09-22 and linked at the end of this section — not from a third-party comparison.
| Criterion | Frontière AI | Groq |
|---|---|---|
| Operating company | FLEECE AI SASU | Groq LLC (Groq UK Limited for customers in Europe) |
| Headquarters | France | Mountain View, California, United States |
| Governing law | French / EU law | State of California (England and Wales for customers in Europe) |
| US CLOUD Act exposure | Inference on the 18 sovereign models runs at EU companies; requests transit the gateway on Vercel (US company, Paris region, no prompt or response stored) | Yes — part of a US group (Groq LLC), even when the contract is with its UK entity, regardless of where inference runs |
| How the catalog works | Curated catalog, 25 models live, each with a named primary provider | Direct provider running its own LPU chips, with a free developer plan |
| GPT-OSS 120B, per 1M tokens (in / out) | €0.252 / €1.008 incl. VAT (€0.21 / €0.84 excl. VAT) | €0.13 ($0.15) / €0.519 ($0.60) excl. tax |
| Prompt storage | Never stored by Frontière AI — only token counts and the amount charged. Sovereign providers: OVHcloud zero retention; Scaleway none except error or abuse requests, up to two weeks; fast-access models: the serving provider's own policy | Its services agreement says Groq does not store inputs or outputs beyond what providing the service requires, and may not train on them without your permission |
| Jurisdiction visible per model | Yes — sovereign / fast access, on the card and in the API response | No jurisdiction labeling per model; Groq runs its own LPU infrastructure |
Prices published in USD, shown converted at 1 USD = 0.8655 EUR (rate of 2026-08-05) alongside the original figure. Groq's services agreement (section 5.3) says fees are exclusive of taxes, which Groq charges as required by law (checked on 2026-09-23). Frontière AI publishes in EUR, margin and VAT included — the amount actually debited — so the price verdicts on this page compare both sides excluding VAT (our price ÷ 1.2, French VAT).
About the price Groq does not publish a per-token price for Llama 3.3 70B — its model list says “Contact sales” — so this row compares GPT-OSS 120B, which both of us serve and Groq prices publicly. Groq runs its own LPU chips and optimises for latency; Frontière AI serves this model through Scaleway, an EU sovereign provider, with a fixed margin. The comparison is asymmetric: if speed is your only criterion, Groq is built for it; if corporate control and EU data protection are yours, that is what our price pays for.
Sources, checked on 2026-09-22: console.groq.com — models & prices · console.groq.com — services agreement · console.groq.com — rate limits (free plan) · groq.com — terms of use
Where Groq is the better choice
- Its own LPU chips, designed for inference, deliver low and predictable latency.
- A free developer plan lets you experiment before paying anything.
- Its services agreement bars it from keeping your inputs and outputs beyond what the service needs, or training on them without your permission.
Where Frontière AI is the better choice
- The operating company is French. There is no US parent, licensee or affiliate through which a US order could reach your data on the sovereign models.
- Every model carries its jurisdiction before you call it, in the catalog and in the API's own response — you never have to reconstruct who served a given request.
- API prompts and completions are never written to our database — only the token counts billing requires. The web console follows the same rule: conversations stay in your browser.
- The price you read is the price you are billed: one price per model, whichever of its named providers serves the call, with no per-request variance to reconcile later.
How to choose, concretely
The two are not mutually exclusive, and for most teams the honest answer is to use both:
- Regulated, personal or client data — anything a DPO signs off on: pick the models whose operator jurisdiction is settled, not just the region.
- Volume experimentation, evaluation sweeps, hobby projects: Groq's free plan and raw speed win, and the jurisdiction question usually does not arise.
- If you only remember one rule: data-centre location is a geography question, and a subpoena is a corporate-control question. Answer the second one first.
FAQ
Is Groq GDPR-compliant?
Groq's services agreement limits what it keeps: it does not store inputs or outputs beyond what providing the service requires, and may not use them for training without permission. European customers contract with Groq UK Limited, under English law. What none of that changes is jurisdictional reach: Groq is a US group, and US legal process under the CLOUD Act applies to data a US company controls, wherever it is processed. Compliance practices and jurisdictional exposure are two separate axes.
Is Frontière AI cheaper than Groq?
Groq does not publish a price for Llama 3.3 70B, so compare on GPT-OSS 120B: Groq publishes €0.13 ($0.15) in / €0.519 ($0.60) out per million tokens before tax, against €0.252 / €1.008 VAT included on Frontière AI. Excluding VAT on both sides (Frontière AI: €0.21 in / €0.84 out per million), on this model Groq is cheaper on both input and output. Our prices include a fixed margin over what named providers charge us, and sovereign EU capacity is not the cheapest capacity on the market. The argument for Frontière AI is jurisdiction, not price.
Does Groq store my prompts?
Its services agreement says Groq does not access, use, store or retain inputs or outputs except as necessary to provide the service or to comply with the law, and may not use them for training without your permission. What that does not address is jurisdictional reach: a US group that keeps nothing is still a US group. On Frontière AI, API prompts are not stored either — and the operating company is French, with no US parent.
Why is Groq so fast?
Groq designed its own chip, the LPU (Language Processing Unit), specifically for inference, and serves models on it rather than on GPUs; its model list publishes the speed it measures for each model. Frontière AI routes to GPU-based providers, which are competitive but not optimised for the same metric. If token speed is your primary criterion, Groq is built for it.
See what we actually serve
25 models live, each with its publisher, licence, hosting jurisdiction and real price.