+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads with 10.3% higher average benchmark score. Both models have similar pricing. Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base supports multimodal inputs. 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 Small 3.1 24B Base represents an updated iteration of the 24B foundation model, developed with architectural refinements and improved training. Built to provide enhanced base capabilities for fine-tuning, it incorporates learnings from previous versions for better downstream performance.
3 months newer
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Meta
2024-12-06
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Mistral AI
2025-03-17
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Input:$0.20
Output:$0.20
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.30
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Average Score:68.5%(+10.3%)
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Average Score:58.2%
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:68.5%(+10.3%)
Providers:9
+
+
+
+
Mistral Small 3.1 24B Base
Avg Score:58.2%
Providers:1