Published official-source price snapshot

A100 cloud price per hour and cost calculator

Compare A100 GPU prices from 6 providers. Observed range: $0.68–$3.40 per GPU-hour, with source evidence, availability signals, and cost estimates.

A100 price snapshot:Checking the declared provider-SLA boundary.Valid through ; historical after that instant.

Citation-ready model evidence

Reuse this A100 snapshot without losing its boundaries

Copy the reconciled model statement with its attribution, exact validity deadline, scope, limitations, canonical URL, and machine-readable evidence endpoint.

For A100, the public-evidence snapshot observed published cloud prices from $0.6788 to $3.3996 per GPU-hour across 6 providers; the latest included observation was 2026-09-09T22:35:29Z.

Valid through ; after that instant, describe the figures as a historical snapshot and verify the linked provider evidence.

  • Scope: Comparable published rates for the exact A100 model; spot and on-demand evidence remain distinct on the canonical page.
  • Limitation: The observed minimum is a price floor, not a provider recommendation.
  • Limitation: Availability evidence is tracked independently and is not inferred from the rate.
  • Limitation: Verify the provider source after valid_through and before committing spend.

Decision snapshot by purchase model

Each card shows the lowest observed representative rate within its own purchase model. Spot and on-demand are intentionally not placed in one cheapest-to-expensive ranking because interruption risk, capacity behavior, and commercial terms are not interchangeable.

These are price floors, not recommendations: availability, region coverage, support, commitments, and workload fit can change the better purchasing choice.

on demand observed floor

Hyperstack · $1.48/GPU hr

240 GPU-hours: $355.20

Region sample
Unspecified
Observed
Valid through
Inspect official source ↗

spot observed floor

Microsoft Azure · $0.68/GPU hr

240 GPU-hours: $162.90

Region sample
eastus
Observed
Valid through
Inspect official source ↗

A100 price by purchase model

Purchase models are kept separate because interruption risk, commitment terms, and capacity behavior are not interchangeable. Each range uses only representative offers that were inside SLA when the snapshot was generated.

Spot vs on-demand low end

54.1% lower observed spot floor

The lowest representative spot rate is $0.68/GPU hr versus $1.48/GPU hr for on-demand. This compares observed price floors only; spot interruption risk, capacity, regions and workload suitability remain separate decisions.

Decision read: Spot has the lower observed floor in this snapshot. Treat that gap as a candidate saving only for workloads that can tolerate interruption and after checking capacity, regions, and workload fit.

Compute-only break-even: at these observed floors, spot could consume up to 118.0% more billed GPU-hours before its compute cost matches the on-demand floor. This threshold does not price engineering work, checkpointing, restart latency, SLA exposure, lost progress, or opportunity cost.

160 GPU-hours · observed floors

$128.20 lower spot cost

Spot floor: $108.60 · On-demand floor: $236.80.

Compute retry budget: spot could add up to 188.9 billed GPU-hours at this baseline before matching the on-demand floor's compute spend.

Price-floor scenario only; interruption risk, capacity, regions, commitments and workload suitability are not priced into this comparison.

240 GPU-hours · observed floors

$192.30 lower spot cost

Spot floor: $162.90 · On-demand floor: $355.20.

Compute retry budget: spot could add up to 283.3 billed GPU-hours at this baseline before matching the on-demand floor's compute spend.

Price-floor scenario only; interruption risk, capacity, regions, commitments and workload suitability are not priced into this comparison.

730 GPU-hours · observed floors

$584.90 lower spot cost

Spot floor: $495.50 · On-demand floor: $1,080.40.

Compute retry budget: spot could add up to 861.7 billed GPU-hours at this baseline before matching the on-demand floor's compute spend.

Price-floor scenario only; interruption risk, capacity, regions, commitments and workload suitability are not priced into this comparison.

At 240 baseline GPU-hours and 0% overhead, spot compute is $162.90 versus $355.20 on-demand.

Enter your own workload size and retry/checkpoint overhead estimate. This check prices billed GPU time only and does not estimate interruption frequency, engineering effort, lost work, latency, SLA exposure, or opportunity cost.

Purchase modelRepresentative offersObserved hourly range730 GPU hr range
on demand6$1.48/GPU hr–$3.40/GPU hr$1,080.40–$2,481.73
spot1$0.68/GPU hr$495.50

Observed A100 price dispersion

Across the representative offers in this snapshot, the normalized rate runs from $0.68 to $3.40 per GPU-hour, a gap of $2.72. At 730 GPU-hours, that rate gap corresponds to $1,986.22.

160 GPU-hours

$435.34 price-range gap

Observed compute budget range: $108.60–$543.94 at this usage level.

If the observed floor rate were otherwise suitable for the same workload, that ceiling budget would mathematically cover 801.4 GPU-hours — 641.4 more than this scenario.

Difference between the lowest and highest representative A100 rates at this usage level.

240 GPU-hours

$653.01 price-range gap

Observed compute budget range: $162.90–$815.91 at this usage level.

If the observed floor rate were otherwise suitable for the same workload, that ceiling budget would mathematically cover 1202.0 GPU-hours — 962.0 more than this scenario.

Difference between the lowest and highest representative A100 rates at this usage level.

730 GPU-hours

$1,986.22 price-range gap

Observed compute budget range: $495.50–$2,481.73 at this usage level.

If the observed floor rate were otherwise suitable for the same workload, that ceiling budget would mathematically cover 3656.2 GPU-hours — 2926.2 more than this scenario.

Difference between the lowest and highest representative A100 rates at this usage level.

Read from the budget floor, the highest observed representative rate is 400.9% above the lowest; read from the ceiling, the lowest is 80.0% below the highest. This is price dispersion, not a guaranteed saving: purchase model, availability, region coverage, support, commitments, and workload fit can differ between offers.

Published A100 cloud pricing evidence

Representative comparable offers were normalized to a per-GPU-hour rate and ranked from lowest to highest when this snapshot was generated.

ProviderVariantMarketPrice730 GPU hrFreshnessObservedEvidence
Microsoft AzurePCIe 80GBspot$0.68/GPU hr$495.50recentValid through 2026-09-10T04:35:25ZSource
HyperstackA100on demand$1.48/GPU hr$1,080.40recentValid through 2026-09-10T22:35:19ZSource
CivoA100on demand$1.79/GPU hr$1,306.70recentValid through 2026-09-10T22:35:19ZSource
Crusoe CloudA100on demand$2.30/GPU hr$1,679.00recentValid through 2026-09-10T22:35:19ZSource
LambdaA100on demand$2.39/GPU hr$1,744.70recentValid through 2026-09-10T22:35:19ZSource
Paperspace40GBon demand$3.09/GPU hr$2,255.70recentValid through 2026-09-10T22:35:29ZSource
Microsoft AzureSXM 40GBon demand$3.40/GPU hr$2,481.73recentValid through 2026-09-10T04:35:25ZSource

A100 regional coverage

These are explicitly named regions reported by offers that were comparable and inside SLA when the snapshot was generated. Counts and provider identities describe observed catalog coverage, not live capacity or guaranteed availability; unspecified placements are not assigned to a region.

Regional provider concentration

0 of 23 named regions have evidence from 2+ providers

0 observed regions included comparable A100 catalog evidence inside SLA from at least two providers at publication, while 23 were represented by one provider only.

Cross-provider catalog coverage: 0% of explicitly named regions.

3+ provider catalog depth: 0 named regions (0%) include a third observed provider option. This is a deeper catalog-diversity signal only, not proof that those providers are operationally substitutable or simultaneously available.

Decision read: Every explicitly named region in this published comparable snapshot is represented by one provider only, so regional fallback planning has no cross-provider catalog evidence here.

Single-provider region watchlist: eastus — Microsoft Azure, italynorth — Microsoft Azure, australiaeast — Microsoft Azure, plus 20 more in the region table below. Each provider shown is only the sole provider represented by comparable catalog rows for that named region in this published snapshot; it is not a live availability or exclusivity claim.

This is a catalog-breadth signal for fallback planning, not proof of simultaneous capacity, failover readiness, quota, latency, workload fit, or contractual substitutability.

RegionOffers inside SLA at publicationProviders representedObserved providers
eastus101Microsoft Azure
italynorth101Microsoft Azure
australiaeast81Microsoft Azure
brazilsouth81Microsoft Azure
canadacentral81Microsoft Azure
centralus81Microsoft Azure
eastus281Microsoft Azure
francecentral81Microsoft Azure
japaneast81Microsoft Azure
centralindia61Microsoft Azure
germanywestcentral61Microsoft Azure
jioindiacentral61Microsoft Azure
jioindiawest61Microsoft Azure
canadaeast21Microsoft Azure
germanynorth21Microsoft Azure
japanwest21Microsoft Azure
norwayeast21Microsoft Azure
ny221Paperspace
southcentralus21Microsoft Azure
usgovvirginia21Microsoft Azure
westeurope21Microsoft Azure
westus221Microsoft Azure
koreacentral11Microsoft Azure
Check availability evidence

Deployability evidence coverage

1 of 7 representative offers (14%) have a non-unknown deployment status backed by a separate HTTPS evidence source and a valid observation time.

Deployability evidence gap

14% separately evidenced

14%

6 representative offers lacked qualifying deployment-eligibility evidence in this published snapshot and remain explicitly unevidenced here.

Decision read: 6 representative offers in this published snapshot should still be treated as unknown for deployability comparisons; do not use a price row as a substitute for capacity evidence.

Deployment eligibility is separate from price freshness. It does not prove live stock or allocatable capacity; offers without qualifying evidence remain explicitly unknown.

Typed availability evidence

Availability is tracked separately from pricing. The evidence kind distinguishes deployment eligibility from live stock or allocatable capacity; none of those claims is inferred from a listed price.

ProviderMarketRegionsStatusEvidence kindObservedEvidence
Microsoft AzurespoteastusunknownunknownNot separately observedNo separate source
Hyperstackon demandUnspecifiedunknownunknownNot separately observedNo separate source
Civoon demandUnspecifiedunknownunknownNot separately observedNo separate source
Crusoe Cloudon demandUnspecifiedunknownunknownNot separately observedNo separate source
Lambdaon demandUnspecifiedunknownunknownNot separately observedNo separate source
Paperspaceon demandny2availabledeployment eligibilityAvailability source
Microsoft Azureon demandeastusunknownunknownNot separately observedNo separate source

Calculate A100 GPU cost

Enter the GPU-hours you expect to consume. The estimate uses the same lowest and highest representative hourly rates shown above and excludes storage, bandwidth, support, taxes, commitments, and negotiated discounts.

At 240 GPU-hours: $162.90–$815.91; observed range gap: $653.01.

A100 cost scenarios

These estimates multiply GPU-hours by the lowest and highest representative hourly rates above. They exclude storage, bandwidth, support, taxes, commitments, and negotiated discounts.

GPU-hoursPublished price range
40$27.15–$135.98
160$108.60–$543.94
240$162.90–$815.91
730$495.50–$2,481.73

Compare A100 by provider

Open the exact provider × A100 decision sheets that passed the autonomous publication gates for this snapshot. Each page keeps provider-specific regions, configurations, evidence, and normalized rates separate from the broader market view above.

Independent human review

Turn this A100 price evidence into a procurement decision

If your choice also depends on workload fit, capacity, contracts, support or migration risk, send us the shortlist and constraints. The fixed-scope review returns a source-linked decision memo and does not accept provider commissions.

Review my GPU decisionRead an illustrative memo

How this comparison is built

  • Only comparable normalized records for the exact A100 model are eligible.
  • Good-freshness records are limited to the existing live, recent, or verified states; 100% of comparable rows met that publication status when this snapshot was generated.
  • Representative rows keep the lowest normalized rate for each provider and market type, so spot and on-demand offers are not blended together.
  • Pricing evidence does not guarantee live capacity. Check the linked source and provider availability before purchasing.

Verification and policies

Review the broader GPU cloud pricing hub, the data sources, the editorial policy, and the corrections policy to inspect how SaaS Sentinel sources, reviews, and corrects published evidence.