Open weights or a hosted API? Compare the operating requirements
Compare delivery methods as operating choices. Downloadable weights and a hosted API can expose different interfaces, controls, and version guarantees, even when their model names look similar.
Build a two-column worksheet
| Requirement | What to verify for each candidate |
|---|---|
| Access | Availability, authentication, and documented restrictions |
| Usage permission | The actual terms associated with the artifact or service |
| Data handling | Documented storage, retention, and processing arrangements |
| Version control | Whether a revision can be pinned and how updates happen |
| Capacity | Your workload, hardware or service limits, and concurrency |
| Maintenance | Who handles runtime updates, failures, and monitoring |
This is an operational checklist. Resolve specific usage questions against the publisher’s current terms and the intended deployment.
Compare costs on one workload
Define the same amount of work for both options. Include setup and maintenance effort alongside compute or API charges. Measure output quality under the actual configuration; a cheaper run is not useful if the result fails the task.
Record the observation date for service pricing and limits. Keep uncertain costs as assumptions rather than presenting an unsupported total.
Test before committing
Run representative inputs through the intended delivery path. Record request settings, error behavior, output formats, and how a version change would be detected. Choose the path that satisfies your requirements with a manageable operating burden.
Return to the task-first selection framework to document the decision.