Nova Lite 1.0 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads Nova Lite 1.0 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 7.7 to 6.7, and Nova Lite 1.0 costs 3.0x less per output token ($0.24 vs $0.72 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 39 benchmarks have a result for both.
Nova Lite 1.0 or Llama 3.3 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 3.0x cheaper ($0.24 vs $0.72 per million) and a larger context window (300K against 131K tokens).
- Shared results
- 39
- Nova Lite 1.0 only
- 2
- Llama 3.3 70B Instruct only
- 12
- 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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct leads, 7.7 against 6.7.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0
Nova Lite 1.0 $0.0002, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct $0.0008 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nova Lite 1.0 not benchmarked, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 9.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- LMArena Text: multi-turn: Nova Lite 1.0 1199 against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 1280, 13.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nova Lite 1.0 $0.24 against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct $0.72 per million output tokens, 3.0x apart.
- Context window
- Nova Lite 1.0 takes 300K tokens, Llama 3.3 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.
| Category | Nova Lite 1.0 | Bars | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 4 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 1 | 4 | ||
| Math | 0 | 4 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 6 | ||
| General | 4 | 14 | ||
| All shared boards | 5 | 34 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 11.9 | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 16.7% | 28.8% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 0.8% | 3.0% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| WeirdML | Not measured | 14.4% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: coding | 1239 | 1268 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | 1241 | 1273 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 6.7 | 7.7 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Not measured | 127.3 | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 17.5% | 26.6% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| BALROG | Not measured | 23.0% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index14
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 43.3% | 49.8% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.3% | 3.6% | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | Not measured | 47.4% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| SimpleBench | Not measured | 19.9% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | 1220 | 1257 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: expert | 1201 | 1225 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | 1226 | 1277 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | 7.0 | 7.7 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 7.0% | 7.7% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Not measured | 5.1% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| MATH level 5 | Not measured | 41.6% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: math | 1227 | 1267 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | 1235 | 1267 | Llama 3.3 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
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.0% | 71.3% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| MMLU | 77.0% | 86.3% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: science | 1232 | 1284 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | 1213 | 1275 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | 1238 | 1284 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | 1219 | 1243 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index414
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | 34.1% | 47.1% | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 19.0% | 15.7% | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| DTBench | Not measured | 59.5% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LMCA | Not measured | 17.5% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| Fiction.LiveBench | Not measured | 33.3% | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text | 1229 | 1274 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | 1205 | 1242 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | 1197 | 1250 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Vision | 990 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | 1243 | 1303 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: non-English | 1208 | 1236 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | 1225 | 1217 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: German | 1229 | 1251 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | 1153 | 1150 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: Korean | 1153 | 1142 | Nova Lite 1.0 |
| LMArena Text: French | 1238 | 1282 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | 1226 | 1269 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: Russian | 1216 | 1252 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1259 | Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | 1199 | 1280 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | 1234 | 1255 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | 1211 | 1255 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | 1176 | 1241 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
| LMArena Vision: English | 999 | Not measured | Only Nova Lite 1.0 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nova Lite 1.0 | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Nova Lite 1.0 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
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.
| Specification | Amazon Nova Lite 1.0 | Meta Llama 3.3 70B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Amazon | Meta Llama |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | December 5, 2024 | December 6, 2024 |
| Context window | 300K | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.06 | $0.45 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.24 | $0.72 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nova Lite 1.0 better than Llama 3.3 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 3.0x cheaper ($0.24 vs $0.72 per million) and a larger context window (300K against 131K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Nova Lite 1.0 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?
Nova Lite 1.0 costs $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.24 per million output tokens; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct costs $0.45 and $0.72. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Nova Lite 1.0 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?
Nova Lite 1.0, with 300K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Nova Lite 1.0 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct comparison based on?
39 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 3.3 70B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.