Battle of the Models

Compare specific LLM models, context windows, and capabilities.

No matches found
VS
No matches found

TinyLlama

llamafile

Intelligence Score 64/100
Model Popularity 0 votes
Context Window Local
Pricing Model Free / Open

Llama 3.1 70B (via routing)

A-TIER

Requesty

Intelligence Score 87/100
Context Window 128K
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 64/100, Llama 3.1 70B (via routing) outperforms TinyLlama by 23 points.

Clear Winner: Significant performance advantage for Llama 3.1 70B (via routing).
HEAD-TO-HEAD

Detailed Comparison

Feature
TinyLlama
Llama 3.1 70B (via routing)
Context Window
Local 128K
Architecture
Transformer (Open Weight) Transformer (Open Weight)
Est. MMLU Score
~60-64% ~80-84%
Release Date
2024 Jul 2024
Pricing Model
Free Tier Paid / Commercial
Rate Limit (RPM)
Hardware dependent 60 RPM
Daily Limit
Unlimited Credit-based
Capabilities
No specific data
No specific data
Performance Tier
C-Tier (Good) A-Tier (Excellent)
Speed Estimate
Medium ⚡ Fast
Primary Use Case
General Purpose General Purpose
Model Size
Undisclosed 70B
Limitations
  • File sizes are large (contain weights)
  • CLI usage often required
  • Windows requires appending .exe
  • Requires underlying provider API keys
  • Free credit amount is limited
  • Routing adds minimal latency
Key Strengths
  • Executable weight files (multi-OS)
  • Integrated Web UI
  • OpenAI Compatible API server
  • AI Router: automatic provider failover
  • Prompt caching for cost savings
  • Multi-provider load balancing

Similar Comparisons