+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct leads with 14.6% higher average benchmark score. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is available on 9 providers. Overall, Llama 3.1 70B Instruct 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.
+
+
+
+
Microsoft
Phi-3.5 Mini was developed by Microsoft as a small language model designed to deliver impressive performance despite its compact size. Built with efficiency in mind, it demonstrates that capable language understanding and generation can be achieved with fewer parameters, making AI more accessible for edge and resource-constrained deployments.
1 month newer
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Meta
2024-07-23
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Microsoft
2024-08-23
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Input:$0.20
Output:$0.20
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.10($0.20 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 5 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Average Score:73.4%(+14.6%)
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Average Score:58.8%
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:73.4%(+14.6%)
Providers:9
+
+
+
+
Phi-3.5-mini-instruct
Avg Score:58.8%
Providers:1