+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs Mistral NeMo Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads with 18.0% higher average benchmark score. Both models have similar pricing. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is available on 9 providers. Overall, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.3 70B was introduced with refinements to the Llama 3 architecture, designed to incorporate improvements in instruction-following and task performance. Built to continue the evolution of Meta's 70B tier, it provides enhanced quality while maintaining the deployment characteristics valued by the open-source community.
+
+
+
+
Mistral AI
Mistral Nemo was developed as a mid-sized instruction-tuned model, designed to balance capability with efficiency for practical deployments. Built to serve as a versatile foundation for various applications, it provides reliable performance across general language understanding and generation tasks.
4 months newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
2024-07-18
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Meta
2024-12-06
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Input:$0.20
Output:$0.20
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15($0.10 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Average Score:86.0%(+18.0%)
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Average Score:68.0%
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
9 providers
Bedrock
Throughput: 100 tok/s
Latency: 0.5ms
Cerebras
Throughput: 2220 tok/s
Latency: 0.65ms
DeepInfra
Throughput: 37 tok/s
Latency: 0.65ms
Fireworks
Throughput: 197 tok/s
Latency: 0.65ms
Groq
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Avg Score:86.0%(+18.0%)
Providers:9
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Avg Score:68.0%
Providers:2