Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B vs Hy-MT2-1.8B
Hy-MT2-1.8B costs 4.2x less per output token than Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B ($0.177 vs $0.75 per million). Updated November 14, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.75
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $0.177
Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B or Hy-MT2-1.8B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B for a larger context window (131K against 8K tokens).
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B
Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B takes 131K tokens against 8K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Hy-MT2-1.8B
Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B $0.0010, Hy-MT2-1.8B $0.0001 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B not benchmarked, Hy-MT2-1.8B 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 3.3 Euryale 70B $0.75 against Hy-MT2-1.8B $0.177 per million output tokens, 4.2x apart.
- Context window
- Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B takes 131K tokens, Hy-MT2-1.8B 8K.
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
Hy-MT2-1.8B costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Hy-MT2-1.8B costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Hy-MT2-1.8B 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 | Sao10K Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B | Tencent Hy-MT2-1.8B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Sao10K | Tencent |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | December 18, 2024 | August 20, 2026 |
| Context window | 131K | 8K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.65 | $0.044 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.75 | $0.177 |
| 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 Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B better than Hy-MT2-1.8B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B for a larger context window (131K against 8K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B or Hy-MT2-1.8B?
Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B costs $0.65 per million input tokens and $0.75 per million output tokens; Hy-MT2-1.8B costs $0.044 and $0.177. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B or Hy-MT2-1.8B?
Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B, with 131K tokens against 8K.
Has any benchmark tested both Llama 3.3 Euryale 70B and Hy-MT2-1.8B?
No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them. Data as of November 14, 2026.