The homepage gives three different speed claims for the same thing. The headline stat says "3.2x vs vLLM", the copy says "2-3x", and the only chart (GPT-OSS 120B on 8xH100 SXM) shows 36k against 26k tokens a second, which is about 1.4x vLLM and 1.3x TensorRT-LLM. None of them has a footnote, date or method, and the Benchmarks page has no report for that chart. Luminal's buyers are inference engineers, and they can do that division in seconds. Fireworks ("up to 4x") and Together ("up to 3.7x") make throughput claims to the same people. If a claim doesn't match the chart on its own page, Luminal loses the comparison before the first call.
First action
Find the run behind "3.2x vs vLLM" and write down its model, hardware, batch size and engine versions.
How to measure it
Homepage to sign-up or call rate
- Now
- –
- Target
- +20%
- By
- 60 days
Steps
Trace each claim
Find the run behind 3.2x, 2-3x, <10ms p99 and 0% overhead.
Founders 1 day
Choose the headline
Keep the number the chart supports, or show the workload where 3.2x is measured.
Founders 1 day
Publish the GPT-OSS report
Configuration, engine versions and settings, date and a reproduce command on /report.
Cloud Inference Engineer 1 week
Footnote every stat
A one-line note and link under each homepage number.
Founders 1 day
Invite a rerun
Ask two outside engineers or the Discord to reproduce it and post results.
Cloud Inference Engineer 2 weeks
Add to the sales kit
The report link opens every first email and call.
Head of Growth ongoing
Rerun quarterly
Against the newest engine versions, with the date updated.
Cloud Inference Engineer quarterly
Why it works
Pick one headline number that the chart on the page supports. Or, if 3.2x is real, show the workload where it was measured: model, hardware, precision, batch size, context length and engine versions. Put a one-line footnote under every stat (3.2x, 2-3x, <10ms p99, 0% overhead) that links to a report page. Each report gives the date, the configuration, the vLLM and TensorRT-LLM versions and settings, and a command to reproduce the run. Add the GPT-OSS 120B run to /report so the homepage chart has a source. The new Head of Growth then gets a first sales asset that says: here is the run, rerun it on your hardware.
Engineers trust a smaller number they can reproduce more than a bigger one they can't. Sourced, consistent claims turn the homepage into something people forward rather than argue with, and next to a reproduce button, a rival's unsourced "up to 4x" looks weaker.
Ready to use
ChecklistBenchmark claim checklist
[ ] One headline number that matches the chart [ ] Model, hardware, precision, batch size, context length [ ] Engine versions and settings for every baseline [ ] Date of the run [ ] Reproduce command and container image [ ] A link from every homepage stat to its report [ ] An owner for the quarterly rerun
Risks and how to handle them
The reproducible number is smaller than 3.2x
A smaller number that holds up beats a bigger one a prospect disproves on a call; lead with cost per token where the gap is larger.
Baselines look badly tuned
Publish the baseline settings and invite engine maintainers to suggest better ones.
Evidence
- Your websiteHomepage (checked twice on November 9, 2026): a headline stat "3.2x" labelled "vs vLLM"; body copy "Models compiled by Luminal consistently outperform existing inference engines by 2-3x on standard benchmarks"; a chart "Tokens/sec, GPT-OSS 120B, 8xH100 SXM" showing Luminal 36k, TensorRT-LLM 28k, vLLM 26k and PyTorch 3k (about 1.4x vLLM and 1.3x TensorRT-LLM); "<10ms" p99 latency and "0%" overhead. None of these has a footnote, date or methodology link, and no customer is named.Source
- Your websiteBenchmarks page (/report): five reports (MiniMax-M2.5, DeepSeek-R1-0528 and Kimi-K2.5 on 8xH200; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B-FP8 and Qwen3-Coder-30B on one H100), each headlined by peak per-user decode speed (93.3 to 172.5 tok/s); no dates, methodology or comparison with vLLM, SGLang or TensorRT-LLM, and no report for the GPT-OSS 120B chart on the homepage.Source
- Competitor researchRivals' own homepages: Fireworks claims "up to 4x the throughput of providers wrapping vLLM", says models are tested against each lab's reference ("KLD <0.007"), names customers such as Notion, Shopify and Cursor, and lists DeepSeek V4.1 Flash at $0.30 input and $1.20 output per million tokens; Together AI claims "up to 3.7x higher throughput" for its Together Compiler with case studies from Cursor, Decagon and Vercept; Baseten sells "The platform for inference, training, and execution".Source
- HiringHead of Growth (Sales, San Francisco, posted November 7, 2026): "Be Luminal's first sales hire and take over our founder-led sales motion"; about 50% pre-sales (pipeline, discovery, closing) and 50% post-sales (onboarding, retention, expansion); 3+ years selling technical infrastructure.Source