Free to start

Cloudflare Clairic vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b

Try both on us. Starter credit covers your first requests, then one key routes Cloudflare Clairic and gpt-oss-120b. Switch by changing the model name.

Compare routesProviders, price, context, and policy posture in one view.

Use auto when uptime mattersKeep a primary model and let fallback handle provider failures.

Same API shapeUse the OpenAI client and set the model you want.

Practical read

Monthly evidence

Cloudflare Clairic has the lower published input-plus-output rate. gpt-oss-120b has more Credits provider routes and the larger context window. There is not enough recent probe data to compare speed.

$0.1055/1MCloudflare Clairic cheapest route

$0.211/1MOpenAI: gpt-oss-120b cheapest route

not enough dataCloudflare Clairic fastest measured p50 TTFT

1033 msOpenAI: gpt-oss-120b fastest measured p50 TTFT via cerebras

The price comparison adds each route's rate for one million input tokens and one million output tokens; your cost depends on your input/output mix. Prices and live route measurements can change. Use the monthly reports when you need a stable evidence window, then run a small task-specific eval before choosing a production default.

Cloudflare ClairicOpenAI: gpt-oss-120b

Model idcloudflare/clairicopenai/gpt-oss-120b

Publishercloudflare OpenAI

AI IQ — IQ 98#132

Context65,536 tokens131,072 tokens

Credits provider routes124

Cheapest route$0.1055/1M$0.211/1M

Cached inputNot published$0.015825/1M to $0.1055/1M

Privacy postureprovider posture varieshas Confidential route (E2EE + ZDR)

Fastest measured p50 TTFTnot enough data1033 ms via cerebras

Highest measured throughputnot enough data132 tok/s via amazon-bedrock

Recent route uptime rangenot enough data88.31% to 100.00%

Modes chat chat

Cloudflare Clairic routes

Overview1 Credits routes

OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b routes

Overview24 Credits routes
PricingInput, cached input, and output rates
ProvidersAll serving providers

Related comparisons

Browse every comparison

OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Z.ai: GLM 5.357 combined provider routes
OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Z.ai: GLM 5.256 combined provider routes
OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Flash56 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K3 vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b52 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b50 combined provider routes
DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b48 combined provider routes
OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b vs Qwen: Qwen3.8 27B43 combined provider routes
MoonshotAI: Kimi K2.6 vs OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b41 combined provider routes

Production choice

Pick a default model. Keep fallback enabled.

TrustedRouter is useful when you know the model you want, but still need provider rollover, budget limits, usage records, and a prompt path you can verify.

OpenAI clientPython

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://api.trustedrouter.com/v1",
    api_key="sk-tr-v1-..."
)

response = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="cloudflare/clairic",
    messages=messages,
)

Questions

Which should I use, Cloudflare Clairic or OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b?

Cloudflare Clairic has the lower published input-plus-output rate. gpt-oss-120b has more Credits provider routes and the larger context window. There is not enough recent probe data to compare speed.

Is Cloudflare Clairic or OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b cheaper?

The current cheapest TrustedRouter route is $0.1055/1M for Cloudflare Clairic and $0.211/1M for OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b. The comparison uses current catalog prices and updates as provider pricing changes.

Is Cloudflare Clairic or OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b faster?

Current measured p50 time to first token is not enough data for Cloudflare Clairic and 1033 ms for OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b. These are routed probe measurements, not vendor-advertised speeds, and update as new samples arrive.

Can I test Cloudflare Clairic and OpenAI: gpt-oss-120b with the same API?

Yes. Use the same OpenAI-compatible TrustedRouter base URL and API key, then change only the model id between cloudflare/clairic and openai/gpt-oss-120b. This makes side-by-side evals possible without maintaining two provider integrations.