Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nova Micro 1.0 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Updated October 21, 2026. 39 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Nova Micro 1.0 Replace Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Nova Micro 1.0Amazon
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
3
Llama 3.3 70B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
7.7
Output $/M
$0.72
36
vs boards won of 39 shared

Decision reading

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

Nova Micro 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 5.1x less, and where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Model ANova Micro 1.0AmazonNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BLlama 3.3 70B InstructMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
39
Nova Micro 1.0 only
0
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct only
12
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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 Micro 1.0 not benchmarked, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 13.0 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run): Nova Micro 1.0 53.1% against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 71.3%, 18.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nova Micro 1.0 $0.14 against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct $0.72 per million output tokens, 5.1x apart.
Context window
Nova Micro 1.0 takes 128K 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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryNova Micro 1.0BarsLlama 3.3 70B InstructTies
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning14
Math04
Knowledge06
General216
All shared boards336
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured11.9Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)14.0%28.8%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)1.5%3.0%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
WeirdMLNot measured14.4%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding12181268Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: software and IT12151273Llama 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
Intelligence benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index5.97.7Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured127.3Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom14.0%26.6%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BALROGNot measured23.0%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
Reasoning benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)35.8%49.8%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.6%3.6%Nova Micro 1.0
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured47.4%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
SimpleBenchNot measured19.9%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts11911257Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: expert11831225Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12031277Llama 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
Math benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Math Index6.07.7Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)6.0%7.7%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured5.1%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured41.6%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math12061267Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: mathematical work12121267Llama 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
Knowledge benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)53.1%71.3%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
MMLU70.8%86.3%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: science12101284Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12071275Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: legal and government12211284Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: business and finance11821243Llama 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
Web design benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index216
General benchmarks for Nova Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
IFBench29.4%47.1%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)13.0%15.7%Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
DTBenchNot measured59.5%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured17.5%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured33.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text12081274Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: instruction following11741242Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: creative writing11721250Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: English12241303Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: non-English11861236Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Chinese12091217Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: German11921251Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Japanese11541150Nova Micro 1.0
LMArena Text: Korean11501142Nova Micro 1.0
LMArena Text: French12381282Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Spanish12251269Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: Russian11851252Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1259Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn11781280Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: longer queries12051255Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: writing and language11921255Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: entertainment and media11631241Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
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 Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkNova Micro 1.0Llama 3.3 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 Micro 1.0$0.0001Fits in one request
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.0008Fits in one request

Nova Micro 1.0 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nova Micro 1.0$0.0022Fits in one request
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.025Fits in one request

Nova Micro 1.0 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nova Micro 1.0$0.0084Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.097Exceeds the context window

Nova Micro 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 Micro 1.0 and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
SpecificationAmazon Nova Micro 1.0Meta Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
MakerAmazonMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 5, 2024December 6, 2024
Context window128K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.035$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.14$0.72
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nova Micro 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. Nova Micro 1.0 has the edge where output tokens cost 5.1x less, and where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Nova Micro 1.0 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Nova Micro 1.0 costs $0.035 per million input tokens and $0.14 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 Micro 1.0 or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the Nova Micro 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 Micro 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.

Compare next