Do You Really Need a GPU to Guard Your LLM? CPU-Class Classifiers and Multi-Stage Pipelines for Safety Enforcement at Scale

Safety classifiers that screen LLM inputs for jailbreak attempts have become standard deployment components, yet almost all production systems rely on GPU-based models: fine-tuned transformers and LLM-as-a-judge pipelines. These approaches impose significant per-query latency and infrastructure cost. Very little research has asked whether CPU-based classifiers, such as support vector machines and gradient-boosted trees trained on TF-IDF features, can match their accuracy across the conditions that production deployments encounter. We evaluate five CPU classifier families, Mamba-130M as an SSM-based GPU classifier, and transformer-based GPU models (DeBERTa-v3 and Gemma-2B with LoRA) across nine jailbreak sources and three regimes: in-distribution (D1), out-of-distribution (D2), and adversarially obfuscated (D3). On D1, the best CPU classifier matches the best transformer GPU model at roughly one-fifth the deployment cost. On D2, CPU classifiers fail via confident miscalibration, producing high-confidence false negatives that bypass escalation entirely. On D3, CPU classifiers outperform transformer GPU models by more than 26 percentage points in F1. Based on these complementary failure modes, we design GuardChain, a three-stage safety pipeline (Regex -> CPU -> GPU) that routes each prompt to the cheapest stage capable of a confident decision. The CPU stage alone resolves 80% of in-distribution prompts at near-peak accuracy, and the GPU stage recovers the out-of-distribution failures. For practitioners deploying LLM safety at scale, this work provides evidence that GPU-class infrastructure is unnecessary for the majority of traffic.