Llama 3.2 11B Vision vs GPT-6.1 Sol
Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison
Related topics (4)
Compare Llama 3.2 11B Vision by Meta against GPT-6.1 Sol by OpenAI across real-world coding, reasoning, token economics, and latency.
Ganti & Bandingkan Model Apa Saja
Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.
Live comparison: no in-depth editorial review has been published for this pair yet.
Llama 3.2 11B Vision
Model Open-WeightsLlama 3.2 11B Vision dari Meta adalah model AI canggih dengan jendela konteks 128K token serta harga API $0/1M token input dan $0/1M token output untuk pemrograman, penalaran, dan otomasi bisnis.
$0.00 / 1M
$0.00 / 1M
128K tokens
N/A
GPT-6.1 Sol
Model Penalaran MendalamGPT-6.1 Sol dari OpenAI adalah model AI canggih dengan jendela konteks 1M token serta harga API $2.0/1M token input dan $10.0/1M token output untuk pemrograman, penalaran, dan otomasi bisnis.
$2.00 / 1M
$10.00 / 1M
1M tokens
82.3%
Perbedaan Utama Sekilas
- Llama 3.2 11B Vision is 1.0x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
- GPT-6.1 Sol has a larger context window (1M vs 128K tokens).
- GPT-6.1 Sol is faster at 120 tok/s vs 120 tok/s.
| Feature | Llama 3.2 11B Vision | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
Intelligence Index Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100) | 66 | 94 |
Provider | Meta | OpenAI |
Input Price Cost per million input tokens | $0.00 / 1M | $2.00 / 1M |
Output Price Cost per million output tokens | $0.00 / 1M | $10.00 / 1M |
Blended Price Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M | $0.00 / 1M | $1.47 / 1M |
Context Window Maximum input + output tokens | 128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text | 1M tokens~1,500 A4 pages of text |
Max Output Tokens Per single request | 4K | 128K |
Throughput Speed Tokens generated per second | 120 tok/s | 120 tok/s |
SWE-bench Verified Real-world software engineering | N/A | 82.3% |
GPQA Diamond Graduate-level reasoning | N/A | 80.8% |
Cached Input Price Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens | $0.00 / 1M | $0.10 / 1M |
Siapa Unggul di Mana?
At-a-glance decision frameworkEvaluations ongoing
Skor Benchmark Terverifikasi
Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.
Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.
Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.
Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.
Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.
Extremely difficult, closed-ended questions spanning the frontier of human expert knowledge.
Autonomous multi-step tasks executed inside a real command-line terminal environment.
Research-grade coding problems drawn from real scientific and numerical workloads.
Contamination-free competitive programming problems collected continuously over time.
American Invitational Mathematics Examination — multi-step Olympiad-level reasoning.
Accuracy when reasoning over very large inputs that fill the model context window.
Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.
Latensi & Waktu Respons
Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.
Simulator Biaya Token Interaktif
Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.
Llama 3.2 11B Vision · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Arsitektur Multimodal cross-attention vision-language transformer mutakhir dari Meta dengan dukungan konteks 128K token
- Efisiensi biaya API yang kompetitif ($0/1M input, $0/1M output) dan respons cepat
- Performa andal dalam pembuatan kode, analisis logika, serta pemahaman multibahasa
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Penggunaan konteks berukuran penuh memerlukan pengelolaan anggaran token yang cermat
- Membutuhkan perancangan prompt yang tepat untuk kasus penggunaan industri spesifik
GPT-6.1 Sol · Strengths & Key Advantages
- Arsitektur Near-Astra unified reasoning model mutakhir dari OpenAI dengan dukungan konteks 1M token
- Efisiensi biaya API yang kompetitif ($2.0/1M input, $10.0/1M output) dan respons cepat
- Performa andal dalam pembuatan kode, analisis logika, serta pemahaman multibahasa
Considerations & Trade-offs
- Penggunaan konteks berukuran penuh memerlukan pengelolaan anggaran token yang cermat
- Membutuhkan perancangan prompt yang tepat untuk kasus penggunaan industri spesifik
Token Use & Task Economics
Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.
| Metric | Llama 3.2 11B Vision | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
Cost per Task Estimated USD to finish one task | $0.00 | $2.05 |
Output Tokens / Task Tokens generated per task | 3K | 62K |
Reasoning Tokens / Task Thinking tokens burned per task | 0K | 36K |
Spesifikasi Teknis
Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.
| Feature | Llama 3.2 11B Vision | GPT-6.1 Sol |
|---|---|---|
| Official API Model ID (SDK) | meta-llama/Llama-3.2-11B-Vision | gpt-6-1-sol |
| API Protocol | OpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI | OpenAI Responses API & Chat Completions v1 |
| Release Date | 2024-09 | 2026-09 |
| Knowledge Cutoff | December 2023 | April 2026 |
| Architecture | Multimodal cross-attention vision-language transformer | Near-Astra unified reasoning model |
| Parameters | 11B | Confidential |
| Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM) | Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud | 10,000 – 30,000 RPM (Tier 5 Enterprise) · 4,000,000 – 10,000,000 TPM |
| Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K) | Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales) | Flat rate ($2/1M in) across full 1000K window |
| Prompt Cache Policy & TTL | Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost) | Automatic prefix caching at $0.1/1M (no extra cache-write fee) |
| Computer Use / GUI Agent | API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop) | Supported (Screen coordinate grounding, browser & desktop GUI action loops) |
| MCP & Parallel Tool Calling | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema | Native MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema |
| Web Search Grounding & Sandbox | Supported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools | Native Web Search tool + Hosted Code Interpreter & File Search RAG |
| Official Fine-Tuning Support | Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory) | Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference (DPO) & Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) |
| Multimodal Token Billing | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) | Text BPE (~4 chars/token) · Vision (~258–765 tokens per image tile) |
| Quantization & Min GPU VRAM | BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 7 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 24 GB VRAM (Native BF16) | Cloud-Hosted Proprietary (FP8 / BF16 Tensor Core Cluster) · Zero Local VRAM Required (100% Serverless Cloud API) |
| Safety & Frontier Classification | Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma) | OpenAI Preparedness Framework Audited & System Card Published |
| Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2) | 100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control | SOC2 Type II · GDPR · Zero Data Retention (ZDR) & HIPAA BAA Available on Enterprise Tier |
| Input Modalities | text, vision | text, vision |
| Output Modalities | text | text |
Llama 3.2 11B Vision vs GPT-6.1 Sol: Jawaban Cepat (FAQ)
Which is more intelligent, Llama 3.2 11B Vision or GPT-6.1 Sol?
GPT-6.1 Sol is more intelligent. It scores 94 compared with 66 on the composite Intelligence Index.
Which model is cheaper to run?
Llama 3.2 11B Vision is cheaper at $0.00 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $1.47 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).
Which model has lower latency?
Llama 3.2 11B Vision has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.31s compared with 1.12s.
Which model has a larger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol has a larger context window, supporting 1M tokens compared with 128K tokens.
Kesimpulan
Choose Llama 3.2 11B Vision for otomasi perusahaan, pengembangan perangkat lunak, agen ai, dan alur kerja produksi berbasis meta, or choose GPT-6.1 Sol for otomasi perusahaan, pengembangan perangkat lunak, agen ai, dan alur kerja produksi berbasis openai.
Pertanyaan Umum (FAQ)
Which is cheaper: Llama 3.2 11B Vision or GPT-6.1 Sol?+
Llama 3.2 11B Vision costs $0/1M input and $0/1M output tokens, while GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/1M input and $10/1M output tokens.
Which model has a larger context window: Llama 3.2 11B Vision or GPT-6.1 Sol?+
Llama 3.2 11B Vision supports 128K tokens whereas GPT-6.1 Sol supports 1M tokens.
Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.
Related reading
- Aion-3.0 vs Aion-Mini: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonBandingkan
- Aion-3.0 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonBandingkan
- Aion-Mini vs Laguna XS 2.1: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonBandingkan
- Aya Expanse 32B vs Llama 3.2 90B Vision: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonBandingkan
- Aya Expanse 8B vs Command R+: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonBandingkan
- Aya Expanse 8B vs Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed ComparisonBandingkan
Benchmark scores, token prices, and rate limits evolve rapidly as AI labs release model updates. Always verify current specifications and pricing on the official provider documentation.
Sumber resmi: Meta & OpenAI Official Documentation