Battle of the Models

Compare specific LLM models, context windows, and capabilities.

No matches found
VS
No matches found

Llama 3.1 70B (via routing)

A-TIER

Requesty

Intelligence Score 87/100
Model Popularity 0 votes
Context Window 128K
Pricing Model Commercial / Paid

meta/llama-3-70b-instruct

A-TIER

Replicate

Intelligence Score 83/100
Context Window 8K tokens
Pricing Model Commercial / Paid
Model Popularity 0 votes
FINAL VERDICT

Llama 3.1 70B (via routing) Wins

With an intelligence score of 87/100 vs 83/100, Llama 3.1 70B (via routing) outperforms meta/llama-3-70b-instruct by 4 points.

Close Match: The difference is minimal. Consider other factors like pricing and features.
HEAD-TO-HEAD

Detailed Comparison

Feature
Llama 3.1 70B (via routing)
meta/llama-3-70b-instruct
Context Window
128K 8K tokens
Architecture
Transformer (Open Weight) Transformer (Open Weight)
Est. MMLU Score
~80-84% ~75-79%
Release Date
Jul 2024 2024
Pricing Model
Paid / Commercial Paid / Commercial
Rate Limit (RPM)
60 RPM Varies by model
Daily Limit
Credit-based Credit-based
Capabilities
No specific data
No specific data
Performance Tier
A-Tier (Excellent) B-Tier (Strong)
Speed Estimate
⚡ Fast ⚡ Fast
Primary Use Case
General Purpose General Purpose
Model Size
70B 70b
Limitations
  • Requires underlying provider API keys
  • Free credit amount is limited
  • Routing adds minimal latency
  • Pay-per-second billing (can be expensive)
  • Cold starts for less popular models
  • Trial credits are minimal
Key Strengths
  • AI Router: automatic provider failover
  • Prompt caching for cost savings
  • Multi-provider load balancing
  • Run any public model with an API
  • Fine-tune existing models easily
  • Cold boots can be slow for unpopular models

Similar Comparisons