Loading...
This guide breaks down when edge infrastructure is worth the investment, how to evaluate carrier-grade, cloud provider, and hybrid approaches, and what real-world implementation looks like for voice AI, healthcare, IoT, and industrial applications.
Edge computing processes data locally at network edges instead of centralized cloud data centers, enabling sub-100ms latency for real-time applications. For enterprises evaluating infrastructure options, the question is no longer whether edge matters, but when it's worth the investment and which approach fits best.
The global edge computing market was valued at $23.65 billion in 2024 and is projected to reach $327.79 billion by 2033, growing at a CAGR of 33%, according to Grand View Research. That growth reflects a fundamental shift: as AI inference, IoT, and real-time communication workloads multiply, centralized cloud architectures are hitting latency limits that physics alone can't solve.
Related articles
This guide breaks down when edge infrastructure is worth the investment, how to evaluate carrier-grade, cloud provider, and hybrid approaches, and what real-world implementation looks like for voice AI, healthcare, IoT, and industrial applications.
The core problem edge computing solves is distance. When data must travel hundreds or thousands of miles to a centralized data center and back, latency accumulates. For workloads where milliseconds determine outcomes, that round trip is the bottleneck.
Voice AI is one of the clearest examples. Research from Hamming AI's analysis of over 4 million production voice agent calls shows that response times above 800ms cause noticeable conversational degradation. Users begin pausing longer, interrupting the agent, or abandoning calls entirely. Above 1,500ms, conversations break down regardless of accuracy. Cloud providers routing voice traffic through centralized regions typically add 400 to 800ms of end-to-end latency, pushing many deployments past the threshold where conversations no longer feel natural.
Regulations like GDPR and HIPAA impose strict requirements on where data can be stored and processed. GDPR restricts transfers of EU residents' personal data outside the European Economic Area without adequate safeguards. HIPAA mandates specific security controls for electronic protected health information. Edge deployments that process data locally can simplify compliance by keeping sensitive information within jurisdictional boundaries, reducing the architectural complexity of cross-border data flows.
IoT deployments generate enormous data volumes. Rather than transmitting raw sensor data to a centralized cloud for processing, edge nodes filter and analyze data locally, sending only actionable insights upstream. This reduces bandwidth consumption and can lower operational costs, particularly for deployments in remote or bandwidth-constrained environments.
For voice AI, edge performance depends on more than where compute runs. It also depends on how many systems sit between the caller and the model. Every extra network hop adds latency, jitter, and more opportunities for audio quality to break down.
Running inference closer to the user helps, but it is only part of the equation. A single-domain architecture keeps connectivity, media handling, and orchestration closer together, reducing operational complexity and improving real-time performance. That matters most for conversational AI workloads, where delays quickly degrade the user experience.
For enterprise voice AI, edge is not just a compute strategy. It is a connectivity strategy too. The strongest architectures reduce both physical distance and vendor handoffs.
Not all edge deployments are equal. The right architecture depends on latency requirements, compliance obligations, and existing infrastructure investments.
Carrier-grade providers own the physical network infrastructure: fiber, points of presence (PoPs), and often the PSTN connections themselves. This ownership eliminates the network hops that add latency when traffic traverses the public internet.
Telnyx, for example, operates a global IP network with PoPs in major metro areas and holds carrier licenses in over 30 countries. By colocating GPU infrastructure directly adjacent to these PoPs, Telnyx delivers sub-200ms RTT for conversational AI workloads, including PSTN connectivity, speech-to-text, text-to-speech, and LLM inference in a single platform.
Hyperscalers like AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud offer edge services (AWS Wavelength, Azure Edge Zones, Google Distributed Cloud) that extend cloud capabilities closer to end users. These services work well for organizations already invested in a cloud ecosystem and are suitable for workloads where 50 to 100ms of additional latency is acceptable. However, they typically don't include native telephony connectivity, requiring additional integration and adding latency for voice workloads.
Many enterprises combine approaches. Latency-critical workloads such as voice AI or real-time industrial controls run at the edge, while batch processing, analytics, and archival storage remain in centralized cloud environments. Programmable networking tools allow traffic to be routed dynamically between edge and cloud based on workload requirements.
| Criteria | Carrier-grade edge | Cloud provider edge | Hybrid |
|---|---|---|---|
| Typical voice AI latency | Sub-200ms RTT | 400–800ms RTT | Varies based on workload routing |
| PSTN connectivity | Native, integrated | Requires third-party SIP provider | Depends on configuration |
| Compliance (HIPAA, GDPR, PCI) | Infrastructure-level, with data residency controls | Shared responsibility model, region-dependent | Split across providers |
| Pricing model | All-in per-minute (e.g., $0.08/min for voice AI) | Per-API metered across multiple services | Combined billing |
| Best suited for | Voice AI, real-time communications, regulated industries | General compute, web applications, AI training | Mixed workloads with varied latency needs |
Start by mapping your application architecture and measuring current end-to-end latency at the P50, P95, and P99 levels. Average latency hides worst-case scenarios. As Hamming AI's production data shows, a team with 400ms average latency may still have 10% of users experiencing 1,500ms delays.
For voice AI, target sub-800ms end-to-end response time. For IoT control systems, sub-50ms may be necessary. For content delivery and web applications, 100 to 200ms is typically sufficient.
Identify which regulatory frameworks apply to your data and where your users are located. If you handle protected health information, HIPAA's security rule requires specific technical safeguards. If you serve EU customers, GDPR's transfer restrictions may necessitate in-region processing. Countries with data localization laws add further constraints that centralized cloud deployments may not satisfy without significant architectural work.
Assess providers on four dimensions:
Network ownership and latency. Providers who own their network infrastructure can guarantee lower and more consistent latency than those routing through the public internet. Ask for P95 latency benchmarks, not just averages.
Compliance certifications. Look for SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA BAA availability, GDPR data processing agreements, and PCI DSS compliance at the infrastructure level, not just the application layer.
Integration complexity. Carrier-grade platforms that bundle telephony, AI inference, and networking reduce both the number of vendors and integration points. Multi-vendor stacks add latency at each handoff.
Pricing transparency. Compare fully loaded costs. A provider quoting $0.03/min for TTS alone may cost significantly more once you add STT, LLM inference, PSTN termination, and number provisioning. Telnyx offers all-in voice AI pricing at $0.08/min that includes the full stack.
Deploy against a controlled subset of traffic. Measure latency, call completion rates, and (for voice AI) caller satisfaction before scaling. A 2022 Gartner projection estimated that conversational AI will reduce contact center agent labor costs by $80 billion by 2026, but realizing those savings requires infrastructure that keeps conversations natural. A pilot helps validate that your edge architecture meets the latency requirements where those savings materialize.
Production edge deployments require continuous latency monitoring across all pipeline stages. Set alerts on P95 and P99 thresholds, not just averages. Build in automatic failover between edge nodes and establish SLAs that reflect real-world performance, not theoretical maximums.
McKinsey's analysis of gen AI deployments in contact centers found that organizations achieving full-stack optimization reduced total call volume by about 30% and average handle time by more than 25%, while improving first-call resolution by 10 to 20 percentage points. These results depend on AI systems that respond fast enough to maintain conversational flow, where edge infrastructure makes the difference.
Remote patient monitoring, telemedicine, and AI-assisted diagnostics all require low-latency data processing with strict compliance controls. Edge deployments keep protected health information within jurisdictional boundaries while enabling real-time analysis of vitals, imaging, and clinical decision support.
Predictive maintenance, quality control, and autonomous systems demand sub-50ms response times that centralized cloud can't reliably deliver. Edge nodes process sensor data locally, triggering alerts and control actions without round-trip delays. IDC's latest edge spending forecast identifies Latin America and Western Europe as the fastest-growing regions for edge investment, driven in part by manufacturing and logistics modernization.
Fraud detection, real-time payment processing, and customer-facing AI agents require both low latency and rigorous compliance. IDC's edge spending forecast identifies banking as the fastest-growing industry vertical for edge adoption, driven by AI-powered operations and real-time fraud analysis.
Edge computing is not a replacement for cloud infrastructure. It's an architectural layer that solves specific problems: latency, data residency, and bandwidth efficiency. The right strategy depends on your workload profile.
If your primary workload is voice AI or real-time communications, a carrier-grade approach that integrates telephony, AI inference, and networking on a single platform will deliver the best latency and simplest integration. If you need edge compute for general workloads alongside an existing cloud investment, cloud provider edge extensions may be the pragmatic choice. Most enterprises will end up with a hybrid architecture that routes each workload to the infrastructure best suited for it.
The market is moving fast. Global edge spending is projected to reach $380 billion by 2028, according to IDC (IDC's forecast uses a broader definition that includes edge-adjacent services). Organizations that establish their edge strategy now will be better positioned to deploy latency-sensitive AI workloads, meet tightening compliance requirements, and scale efficiently as voice AI and global number provisioning reach more markets. Start with a latency audit of your most critical workloads to determine where edge infrastructure will have the highest impact.
Inference latency is the time it takes an AI model to produce an output after it receives an input. It is usually measured in milliseconds per request, or in generative systems, milliseconds per token and time to first token. For a broader look at how latency affects production systems, see AI latency.
Inference latency is measured by timing how long a model takes to return a prediction or generate output during inference. Teams often track p50, p95, and p99 latency, plus metrics like time to first token and total time per response.
High inference latency usually comes from large model size, inefficient serving infrastructure, slow hardware, long input context, or heavy traffic. Poor batching strategy, memory bottlenecks, and unoptimized model runtimes can also slow responses. In voice systems, network design also plays a major role, especially in conversational AI workloads.
You can reduce inference latency by using smaller or quantized models, optimizing the serving stack, and running on faster hardware such as GPUs built for inference. Other common tactics include caching repeated results, shortening prompts or context, and tuning batching carefully so throughput gains do not hurt response time too much. For a deeper look at infrastructure choices, see inference engine.
Inference latency measures how fast one request gets a response. Throughput measures how many requests or tokens a system can process over a period of time. A system can have good throughput but still poor latency if individual requests wait in a queue or batch.
A good inference latency depends on the use case, but real-time applications usually aim for response times low enough to feel immediate to the user. In many interactive AI systems, that means keeping time to first token and total response latency in the low hundreds of milliseconds when possible. For voice-specific benchmarks, see how Telnyx fixed voice AI latency with co-located infrastructure.
Larger models usually increase inference latency because they require more computation and memory movement per request. Better hardware, optimized accelerators, and enough memory bandwidth can reduce latency significantly, while underpowered or mismatched hardware often makes even well-tuned models feel slow. For related infrastructure context, see machine learning inference.
