Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) leads Llama 3.1 8B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 8.4 to 6.9, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs 125.0x less per output token ($0.08 vs $10.00 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$10.00
5
Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
17.9
Output $/M
$0.08
0
vs boards won of 5 shared

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct: which to pick

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

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
5
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) only
19
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
46
Like-for-like categories
4 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
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) not benchmarked, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 23.4 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
MATH level 5: GPT-4o (2024-11-20) 49.8% against Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 22.9%, 26.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) $10.00 against Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 per million output tokens, 125.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-11-20) takes 128K tokens, Llama 3.1 8B 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
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-11-20)BarsLlama 3.1 8B InstructTies
Coding10
Intelligence10
Reasoning10
Math20
All shared boards50
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
Aider polyglot18.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured5.4Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)43.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured11.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured0.8%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSO-Bench0.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
WeirdML25.1%1.7%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
Cybench12.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1195Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1195Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index8.46.9GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured116.5Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured16.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured15.1%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
TheAgentCompany8.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured25.8%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond53.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)62.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured25.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured5.3%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)47.9%27.0%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
VPCT40.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1174Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1144Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1195Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
AIME11.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)74.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MGSM (Vals AI)90.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
AA Math IndexNot measured4.3Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured4.3%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME6.3%1.7%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
MATH level 549.8%22.9%GPT-4o (2024-11-20)
GSM8KNot measured82.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1179Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1180Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro72.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)59.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)45.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)74.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)57.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured47.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured56.1%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GeoBench71.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1193Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1182Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1206Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1166Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index22 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B InstructLeader
IFBenchNot measured28.6%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured18.0%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
DTBenchNot measured50.9%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured5.4%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)81.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-11-20) measured
PIQANot measured81.2%Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena TextNot measured1187Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1159Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1154Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1217Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1148Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1151Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1144Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1061Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1053Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1178Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1169Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1158Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1172Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1181Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1162Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1145Only Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-11-20)Llama 3.1 8B 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

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)$0.0075Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)$0.155Fits in one request
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-11-20)$0.600Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 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 GPT-4o (2024-11-20) and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-11-20)Meta Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
MakerOpenAIMeta Llama
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedNovember 20, 2024July 23, 2024
Context window128K131K
Input $/Mtok$2.50$0.05
Output $/Mtok$10.00$0.08
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-11-20) better than Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-11-20) or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

GPT-4o (2024-11-20) costs $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens; Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 and $0.08. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4o (2024-11-20) or Llama 3.1 8B Instruct?

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, with 131K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-11-20) vs Llama 3.1 8B Instruct comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 23, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-11-20)'s coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next