Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova Lite 1.0 vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Nova Lite 1.0 leads Llama 3.1 70B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 6.7 to 6.6, and Nova Lite 1.0 costs 2.3x less per output token ($0.24 vs $0.56 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 38 benchmarks have a result for both.

Nova Lite 1.0Amazon
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.24
9
Llama 3.1 70B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
24.3
Output $/M
$0.56
29
vs boards won of 38 shared

Nova Lite 1.0 or Llama 3.1 70B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Nova Lite 1.0 for output tokens 2.3x cheaper ($0.24 vs $0.56 per million) and a larger context window (300K against 131K tokens).

Shared results
38
Nova Lite 1.0 only
3
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct only
9
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Nova Lite 1.0 not benchmarked, Llama 3.1 70B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 6.1 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
LMArena Text: multi-turn: Nova Lite 1.0 1199 against Llama 3.1 70B Instruct 1256, 9.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova Lite 1.0 $0.24 against Llama 3.1 70B Instruct $0.56 per million output tokens, 2.3x apart.
Context window
Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Llama 3.1 70B Instruct 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova Lite 1.0BarsLlama 3.1 70B InstructTies
Coding04
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning14
Math22
Knowledge06
General413
All shared boards929
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)16.7%23.2%Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%3.0%Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
WeirdMLNot measured9.0%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding12391260Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: software and IT12411260Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.76.6Nova Lite 1.0
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured125.9Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom17.5%15.2%Nova Lite 1.0
BALROGNot measured27.9%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
TheAgentCompanyNot measured6.9%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)43.3%40.9%Nova Lite 1.0
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%4.5%Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured44.2%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12201241Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: expert12011209Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12261261Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22
Math benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
AA Math Index7.04.0Nova Lite 1.0
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)7.0%4.0%Nova Lite 1.0
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured3.6%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured36.7%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math12271252Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: mathematical work12351253Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)59.0%67.6%Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
MMLU77.0%80.1%Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: science12321276Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12131257Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: legal and government12381283Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: business and finance12191235Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index413
General benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
IFBench34.1%34.4%Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)19.0%Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
DTBenchNot measured60.0%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured14.8%Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text12291261Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: instruction following12051231Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: creative writing11971232Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Vision990Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
LMArena Text: English12431294Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: non-English12081219Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Chinese12251215Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: German12291222Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: Japanese11531132Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: Korean11531140Nova Lite 1.0
LMArena Text: French12381262Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Spanish12261253Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Russian12161234Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: multi-turn11991256Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: longer queries12341241Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: writing and language12111236Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11761230Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
LMArena Vision: English999Not measuredOnly Nova Lite 1.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Lite 1.0Llama 3.1 70B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Nova Lite 1.0$0.0002Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct$0.0008Fits in one request

Nova Lite 1.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova Lite 1.0$0.0037Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct$0.030Fits in one request

Nova Lite 1.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova Lite 1.0$0.014Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct$0.118Exceeds the context window

Nova Lite 1.0 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Nova Lite 1.0 and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
SpecificationAmazon Nova Lite 1.0Meta Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
MakerAmazonMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 5, 2024July 23, 2024
Context window300K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.06$0.56
Output $/Mtok$0.24$0.56
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova Lite 1.0 better than Llama 3.1 70B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Nova Lite 1.0 for output tokens 2.3x cheaper ($0.24 vs $0.56 per million) and a larger context window (300K against 131K tokens).

Which is cheaper, Nova Lite 1.0 or Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Nova Lite 1.0 costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.24 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1 70B Instruct costs $0.56 and $0.56. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Nova Lite 1.0 or Llama 3.1 70B Instruct?

Nova Lite 1.0, with 300K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Nova Lite 1.0 vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct comparison based on?

38 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nova Lite 1.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next