Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 vs Cydonia 24B V4.1

Cydonia 24B V4.1 costs 1.7x less per output token than Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 ($0.50 vs $0.85 per million). Updated October 23, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

S Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2Sao10K
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.85
T Cydonia 24B V4.1TheDrummer
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.50
vs $0.85 vs $0.50 per 1M output tokens. Cydonia 24B V4.1 is 1.7x cheaper.

Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 or Cydonia 24B V4.1: 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.

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them.

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 Euryale 70B v2.2 not benchmarked, Cydonia 24B V4.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 $0.85 against Cydonia 24B V4.1 $0.50 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window
Both take 131K tokens.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

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 Euryale 70B v2.2$0.0013Fits in one request
Cydonia 24B V4.1$0.0006Fits in one request

Cydonia 24B V4.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2$0.045Fits in one request
Cydonia 24B V4.1$0.017Fits in one request

Cydonia 24B V4.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2$0.178Exceeds the context window
Cydonia 24B V4.1$0.065Exceeds the context window

Cydonia 24B V4.1 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 Euryale 70B v2.2 and Cydonia 24B V4.1
SpecificationSao10K Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2TheDrummer Cydonia 24B V4.1
MakerSao10KTheDrummer
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 28, 2024September 27, 2025
Context window131K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.85$0.30
Output $/Mtok$0.85$0.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 better than Cydonia 24B V4.1 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, Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 or Cydonia 24B V4.1?

Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 costs $0.85 per million input tokens and $0.85 per million output tokens; Cydonia 24B V4.1 costs $0.30 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 or Cydonia 24B V4.1?

Neither: both take 131K tokens.

Has any benchmark tested both Llama 3.1 Euryale 70B v2.2 and Cydonia 24B V4.1?

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them. Data as of October 23, 2026.

Compare next