Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs o3 Mini

Updated October 21, 2026. 42 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace Llama 3.1 70B Instruct Replace o3 Mini
Llama 3.1 70B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
6.6
Output $/M
$0.56
0
o3 MiniOpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
12.5
Output $/M
$4.40
42
vs boards won of 42 shared

Decision reading

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

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has the edge where output tokens cost 7.9x less, and where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Model ALlama 3.1 70B InstructMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel Bo3 MiniOpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
42
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct only
5
o3 Mini only
28
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
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct not benchmarked, o3 Mini not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 45.3 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
OTIS Mock AIME: Llama 3.1 70B Instruct 3.6% against o3 Mini 76.9%, 73.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct $0.56 against o3 Mini $4.40 per million output tokens, 7.9x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct takes 131K tokens, o3 Mini 200K.

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
CategoryLlama 3.1 70B InstructBarso3 MiniTies
Coding05
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning06
Math04
Knowledge05
General019
All shared boards042
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured60.4%Only o3 Mini measured
SWE-bench VerifiedNot measured42.4%Only o3 Mini measured
SWE-bench LiteNot measured32.3%Only o3 Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)Not measured71.5%Only o3 Mini measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)23.2%73.4%o3 Mini
SciCodeNot measured42.8%Only o3 Mini measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.0%6.8%o3 Mini
GSO-BenchNot measured1.3%Only o3 Mini measured
WeirdML9.0%43.7%o3 Mini
CybenchNot measured22.5%Only o3 Mini measured
LMArena Text: coding12601378o3 Mini
LMArena Text: software and IT12601364o3 Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.612.5o3 Mini
Epoch Capabilities Index125.9140.2o3 Mini
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom15.2%31.3%o3 Mini
BALROG27.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
TheAgentCompany6.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
GPQA DiamondNot measured75.5%Only o3 Mini measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)40.9%77.3%o3 Mini
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.5%12.0%o3 Mini
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)44.2%77.0%o3 Mini
ARC-AGINot measured34.5%Only o3 Mini measured
ARC-AGI-2Not measured3.0%Only o3 Mini measured
SimpleBenchNot measured22.8%Only o3 Mini measured
Chess puzzlesNot measured15.0%Only o3 Mini measured
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured7.0%Only o3 Mini measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12411365o3 Mini
LMArena Text: expert12091364o3 Mini
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12611375o3 Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
AIMENot measured86.5%Only o3 Mini measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured91.8%Only o3 Mini measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured91.3%Only o3 Mini measured
AA Math Index4.0Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)4.0%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME3.6%76.9%o3 Mini
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured18.6%Only o3 Mini measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured0.0%Only o3 Mini measured
MATH level 536.7%96.5%o3 Mini
LMArena Text: math12521396o3 Mini
LMArena Text: mathematical work12531399o3 Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
MMLU ProNot measured78.7%Only o3 Mini measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)Not measured71.5%Only o3 Mini measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured45.3%Only o3 Mini measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)Not measured69.4%Only o3 Mini measured
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured94.8%Only o3 Mini measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)67.6%80.2%o3 Mini
SimpleQA VerifiedNot measured15.3%Only o3 Mini measured
MMLU80.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science12761339o3 Mini
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12571330o3 Mini
LMArena Text: legal and government12831328o3 Mini
LMArena Text: business and finance12351313o3 Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
IFBench34.4%67.1%o3 Mini
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured43.0%Only o3 Mini measured
DTBench60.0%68.8%o3 Mini
LMCA14.8%19.0%o3 Mini
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured50.0%Only o3 Mini measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured61.7%Only o3 Mini measured
LMArena Text12611337o3 Mini
LMArena Text: instruction following12311337o3 Mini
LMArena Text: creative writing12321286o3 Mini
LMArena Text: English12941351o3 Mini
LMArena Text: non-English12191319o3 Mini
LMArena Text: Chinese12151379o3 Mini
LMArena Text: German12221303o3 Mini
LMArena Text: Japanese11321286o3 Mini
LMArena Text: Korean11401313o3 Mini
LMArena Text: French12621334o3 Mini
LMArena Text: Spanish12531321o3 Mini
LMArena Text: Russian12341304o3 Mini
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1294Only o3 Mini measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12561320o3 Mini
LMArena Text: longer queries12411343o3 Mini
LMArena Text: writing and language12361313o3 Mini
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12301283o3 Mini
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 70B Instructo3 MiniLeader
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

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct$0.0008Fits in one request
o3 Mini$0.0033Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct$0.030Fits in one request
o3 Mini$0.068Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct$0.118Exceeds the context window
o3 Mini$0.264Exceeds the context window

Llama 3.1 70B 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 Llama 3.1 70B Instruct and o3 Mini
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.1 70B InstructOpenAI o3 Mini
MakerMeta LlamaOpenAI
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedJuly 23, 2024January 31, 2025
Context window131K200K
Input $/Mtok$0.56$1.10
Output $/Mtok$0.56$4.40
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.1 70B Instruct better than o3 Mini for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has the edge where output tokens cost 7.9x less, and where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 70B Instruct or o3 Mini?

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct costs $0.56 per million input tokens and $0.56 per million output tokens; o3 Mini costs $1.10 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.1 70B Instruct or o3 Mini?

o3 Mini, with 200K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.1 70B Instruct vs o3 Mini comparison based on?

42 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and o3 Mini's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next