+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs o1
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
o1 leads with 17.4% higher average benchmark score. o1 offers 44.0K more tokens in context window than Llama 3.1 70B Instruct. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is $74.60 cheaper per million tokens. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is available on 9 providers. Overall, o1 is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B was created as a balanced open-source model, designed to provide strong performance with 70 billion parameters while remaining practical for many deployment scenarios. Built to serve as a versatile foundation for fine-tuning and application development, it combines capability with accessibility in the open-source ecosystem.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
o1 was developed as part of OpenAI's reasoning-focused model series, designed to spend more time thinking before responding. Built to excel at complex reasoning tasks in science, coding, and mathematics, it employs extended internal reasoning processes to solve harder problems than traditional language models through careful step-by-step analysis.
4 months newer
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Meta
2024-07-23
o1
OpenAI
2024-12-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Input:$0.20
Output:$0.20($74.60 cheaper)
+
+
+
+
o1
Input:$15.00
Output:$60.00
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Average Score:68.6%
+
+
+
+
o1
Average Score:86.0%(+17.4%)
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
9 providers
Bedrock
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Cerebras
Throughput: 1204 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
DeepInfra
Throughput: 25 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Fireworks
Throughput: 32 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Groq
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Avg Score:68.6%
Providers:9
+
+
+
+
o1
Avg Score:86.0%(+17.4%)
Providers:2