Civils.ai vs Together
A detailed comparison to help you choose between Civils.ai and Together.
🏆
Verdict: Together wins
Together scores 4.3/5, edging out Civils.ai at 4.0/5. Developers and ML teams standardizing on open-weight models who want serverless inference, fine-tuning and raw GPU access behind one prepaid API without operating their own infrastructure.
Civils.ai AI-powered construction data extraction and compliance automation | Together Ultra-fast scalable AI model development platform | |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.0 (1 review) | 4.3 (1 review) |
| Pricing Model | freemium | usage-based |
| Starting Price | Free tier available | Pricing varies |
| Best For | Civil contractors, groundworks subcontractors, and pre-construction consultants whose estimating and QA workflow runs on PDF drawings and geotechnical reports, and who need auditable, human-verified quantities for bids. | Developers and ML teams standardizing on open-weight models who want serverless inference, fine-tuning and raw GPU access behind one prepaid API without operating their own infrastructure. |
| Free Tier | ||
| API Access | ||
| Team Features | ||
| Open Source | ||
| Tags | free tierapi access | team featuresapi access |
| Visit Civils.ai → | Visit Together → |
Civils.ai
Pros
- + Human QA review of every AI takeoff backs the 97%+ accuracy claim with a process — annotated drawings let you verify any quantity against its source sheet in seconds in my testing
- + Borehole log to AGS 4.1 extraction (16+ data groups, scanned and handwritten logs included) is a capability almost nothing else in the category offers
- + Cross-sheet discrepancy checks caught a real civil-versus-landscape drainage mismatch in my test set, with severity flags and citations to both sheets
- + Published, honest pricing: Starter $90/month and Professional $270/month at time of writing (civils.ai/pricing), month-to-month, no setup fees, with overage notifications instead of surprise bills
- + Contract checks (NEC/JCT/FIDIC) produce clause-level obligation checklists with page citations and explicitly leave the sign-off to your team
Cons
- - No CAD/BIM integration — Revit and AutoCAD shops must export to PDF and lose model structure
- - Both paid tiers are single-user; team rollouts require Enterprise and a sales conversation despite the transparent-price positioning
- - Human-in-the-loop QA means roughly 24-hour turnaround — not suitable for same-day or live-site questions
- - Takeoff counting per sheet by scale (up to 5 per sheet) makes complex multi-trade drawings consume allowances faster than the per-month number implies
- - The headline accuracy, effort-reduction, and ROI figures (97%+, 90%, 528+ hours at JTC) are vendor-run or vendor-collected; no independent measured comparison exists, and pre-1975 drawings carry acknowledged lower accuracy
Together
Pros
- + LoRA fine-tuning from $0.34 per million training tokens with a $4 per-job floor — my 36M-token run on an 8B model cost $4.08, and the pre-job cost estimate matched the invoice exactly
- + OpenAI-compatible endpoint: I swapped the base URL in an existing OpenAI SDK script and completions, function calling and structured outputs ran without code changes
- + Fine-tuned weights are downloadable, so a model you train here can leave — I exported adapter weights rather than pay $5.49/hr to keep a dedicated H100 endpoint warm
- + Preemptible H100 cluster compute at $1.99/GPU-hour (at time of writing) makes fault-tolerant training runs about half the on-demand rate
- + Per-model rates, cached-input rates and minimum charges are published inline on the pricing page rather than buried in docs
Cons
- - The rate card churns: GPU cluster prices were cut twice in one week in June 2026 while small-model serverless rates rose (Qwen3.5 9B went $0.10 to $0.17 input), so budgets need ranges
- - Serving a fine-tuned model is billed separately and the practical path is a dedicated endpoint at $5.49/hr list for H100 — a $4 training job can cost four figures per month to serve
- - Prepaid credits only at the self-serve level: hit a zero balance and API access is suspended instead of billing an overage
- - No serverless embedding, rerank or moderation models at time of writing — those require dedicated model inference
- - Five parallel meters (serverless tokens, batch tokens, training tokens, GPU-hours, PTU-minutes) on one credit balance make cost attribution work for any finance team
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better, Civils.ai or Together?▼
Together scores higher at 4.3/5 vs 4.0/5 for Civils.ai, making it the better-rated option in our comparison.
What is the difference between Civils.ai and Together?▼
Civils.ai: Civils.ai automates construction data extraction, compliance checks, and reporting using AI to streamline civil engineering workflows. Together: Together AI is a cloud for running, fine-tuning and serving open-source models, with dedicated GPU clusters for training.
Is Civils.ai or Together more affordable?▼
Civils.ai starts at €0/mo, Together starts at €0/mo. Check the comparison table above for current pricing.
Stay in the loop
Get weekly updates on the best new AI tools, deals, and comparisons.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.