Head-to-Head Model Comparison

Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.1 405B

Benchmarks, API Token Pricing, Context Window & Speed Comparison

GetInfoUs 연구팀 검토 완료최종 검토일: October 2026편집 정책
공유
Related topics (12)
AI CompareAI BenchmarkToken PricingModel CostModel SpecsSWE-bench CodingModel VersusWhich AI ModelLLM Speed & LatencyReasoning ModelsExtended ThinkingPrompt Caching ROI
Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.1 405B: Benchmarks, Pricing & Speed Comparison

Llama 3.1 70B by Meta and Llama 3.1 405B by Meta represent two of the frontier AI models analyzed in our comprehensive 2026 AI benchmark and LLM comparison. In this head-to-head evaluation, we examine API token pricing, context window specifications, inference speed (tokens per second), and empirical reasoning performance. From a pure economic perspective, both models offer identical input token rates. On output generation, costs are matched. In data-heavy architectures requiring extensive repository or document analysis, both models provide an identical memory horizon with 128K tokens. In latency-sensitive production environments, Llama 3.1 70B leads in tokens-per-second throughput, making it ideal for real-time conversational agents and high-concurrency workflows. Below is the complete empirical head-to-head breakdown across cost, speed, context, and capability matrices.

1:1 모델 맞대결 비교 (VS)

원하는 AI 모델 선택 및 실시간 비교

Select any AI models from our verified benchmark database to generate live side-by-side matrices.

Profile
Profile
Multi-Model Arena Stack:
5-Model Matrix Workbench
Popular Matchups:
Meta

Llama 3.1 70B

오픈 웨이트 모델

Meta의 Llama 3.1 70B 모델은 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 윈도우와 입력 $0/1M 토큰, 출력 $0/1M 토큰의 합리적인 API 요금을 제공하며 코딩, 추론 및 엔터프라이즈 자동화에 최적화되어 있습니다.

Intelligence Index75 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

42%

Meta

Llama 3.1 405B

오픈 웨이트 모델

Meta의 Llama 3.1 405B 모델은 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 윈도우와 입력 $0.0/1M 토큰, 출력 $0.0/1M 토큰의 합리적인 API 요금을 제공하며 코딩, 추론 및 엔터프라이즈 자동화에 최적화되어 있습니다.

Intelligence Index48 / 100
Input Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Output Token:

$0.00 / 1M

Context Window:

128K tokens

SWE-bench Verified:

41.5%

한눈에 보는 핵심 차이점

  • Llama 3.1 70B is 1.0x cheaper for API usage (input + output tokens combined).
  • Llama 3.1 70B is faster at 75 tok/s vs 50 tok/s.
  • Llama 3.1 70B leads on SWE-bench coding (42.0% vs 41.5%).
Need definitions for token pricing, context, or benchmarks?Explore AI Glossary →
FeatureLlama 3.1 70BLlama 3.1 405B
Intelligence Index
Composite reasoning & knowledge score (0-100)
7548
Provider
MetaMeta
Input Price
Cost per million input tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Output Price
Cost per million output tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.00 / 1M
Blended Price
Weighted 7:2:1 cache:input:output per 1M
$0.00 / 1M$0.53 / 1M
Context Window
Maximum input + output tokens
128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text128K tokens~192 A4 pages of text
Max Output Tokens
Per single request
8K8K
Throughput Speed
Tokens generated per second
75 tok/s50 tok/s
SWE-bench Verified
Real-world software engineering
42%41.5%
GPQA Diamond
Graduate-level reasoning
52%53%
Cached Input Price
Prompt caching discount per 1M tokens
$0.00 / 1M$0.75 / 1M

부문별 우위 모델

At-a-glance decision framework
Coding
Llama 3.1 70B
+0.5% SWE-bench lead
Cost
Llama 3.1 70B
1.0x cheaper monthly runtime
Speed
Llama 3.1 70B
+50% faster generation
Context
Tied
128K tokens window

검증된 벤치마크 점수 비교

Official evaluation metrics verified by independent third-party research labs.

Llama 3.1 70BLlama 3.1 405B
SWE-bench Verified (Autonomous Coding)

Industry benchmark evaluating real-world GitHub issue resolution and multi-file debugging.

42%vs41.5%
GPQA Diamond (Doctorate-Level Science & Math)

Challenging questions created by domain experts to test complex PhD-level reasoning.

52%vs53%
MMLU-Pro (Multi-task Language Understanding)

Hardened reasoning and academic knowledge benchmark with reduced lucky-guess probability.

79.5%vs77.2%
LMSYS Chatbot Arena Elo

Crowdsourced human preference evaluation based on blind, head-to-head model battles.

1330ptsvs1288pts
Generation Speed (Throughput)

Tokens emitted per second during active generation streaming.

75 tok/s vs50 tok/s

지연 시간(Latency) 및 응답 속도

Time to first token (TTFT) and estimated end-to-end response time for a typical 500-token response.

Time to First Token (TTFT)Lower is better
Llama 3.1 70B0.40s
Llama 3.1 405B0.85s
Est. End-to-End Response (500 tokens)TTFT + generation time
Llama 3.1 70B7.07s
Llama 3.1 405B10.85s

실시간 API 토큰 비용 시뮬레이터

Adjust sliders to calculate projected monthly cloud API spending with prompt caching discounts.

100K / day
10K500K1M
30K / day
5K150K300K
50% cached
0% (Cold)50%90% (Warm)
Llama 3.1 70B Monthly API Bill
$0.00 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Llama 3.1 405B Monthly API Bill
$1.13 / month
$0/1M in · $0/1M out
Llama 3.1 70B saves approximately $1.13 / month (100%) under this workload.1.0x Savings

Llama 3.1 70B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Meta의 첨단 High-capacity dense multilingual transformer 아키텍처와 최대 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 지원
  • 경쟁력 있는 API 가격(입력 $0/1M, 출력 $0/1M)과 빠른 응답 속도
  • 코드 생성, 복잡한 논리 추론 및 다국어 벤치마크에서 검증된 성능 발휘
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 대규모 장문 컨텍스트 처리 시 토큰 비용 및 호출 한도 관리가 필요함
  • 특수 도메인 작업에서는 정교한 프롬프트 엔지니어링과 RAG 연동이 권장됨

Llama 3.1 405B · Strengths & Key Advantages

  • Meta의 첨단 World’s Largest Open Foundation Transformer 아키텍처와 최대 128K 토큰 컨텍스트 지원
  • 경쟁력 있는 API 가격(입력 $0.0/1M, 출력 $0.0/1M)과 빠른 응답 속도
  • 코드 생성, 복잡한 논리 추론 및 다국어 벤치마크에서 검증된 성능 발휘
Considerations & Trade-offs
  • 대규모 장문 컨텍스트 처리 시 토큰 비용 및 호출 한도 관리가 필요함
  • 특수 도메인 작업에서는 정교한 프롬프트 엔지니어링과 RAG 연동이 권장됨

Token Use & Task Economics

Estimated cost and token consumption to complete one representative agentic task.

MetricLlama 3.1 70BLlama 3.1 405B
Cost per Task
Estimated USD to finish one task
$0.00$0.20
Output Tokens / Task
Tokens generated per task
6K24K
Reasoning Tokens / Task
Thinking tokens burned per task
0K0K

기술 사양 (Specifications)

Architecture, release timeline, capabilities, and modalities.

FeatureLlama 3.1 70BLlama 3.1 405B
Official API Model ID (SDK)meta-llama/Llama-3.1-70Bmeta-llama/Llama-3.1-405B
API ProtocolOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGIOpenAI-Compatible REST / vLLM / SGLang / HuggingFace TGI
Release Date2024-072024-07
Knowledge CutoffDecember 2023December 2023
ArchitectureHigh-capacity dense multilingual transformerWorld’s Largest Open Foundation Transformer
Parameters70B405B
Enterprise Rate Limits (RPM / TPM)Unlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed CloudUnlimited (Hardware-bound on self-hosted GPU) / 10,000 RPM Cloud · Unlimited local throughput / 10M+ TPM Managed Cloud
Long-Context Tier (>128K/200K)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)Free across full context window (only KV-cache VRAM scales)
Prompt Cache Policy & TTLAutomatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)Automatic prefix KV-caching in vLLM / SGLang (0 cost)
Computer Use / GUI AgentAPI / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)API / CLI Tool-Use & DOM Agent ready (no raw pixel desktop click loop)
MCP & Parallel Tool CallingNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON SchemaNative MCP Client/Server ready · Parallel function calling · 100% Strict JSON Schema
Web Search Grounding & SandboxSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox toolsSupported via external Tavily/Exa Search & E2B/Docker Sandbox tools
Official Fine-Tuning SupportFull Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)Full Weights SFT, LoRA, QLoRA, DPO & GRPO RL (Unsloth / Axolotl / Llama-Factory)
Multimodal Token BillingText BPE (~4 chars/token)Text BPE (~4 chars/token)
Quantization & Min GPU VRAMBF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 43 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 151 GB VRAM (Native BF16)BF16 / FP16, FP8 Dynamic, INT4 AWQ / GPTQ, GGUF (Q4_K_M / Q8_0) · 251 GB VRAM (4-bit Quantized) · 871 GB VRAM (Native BF16)
Safety & Frontier ClassificationOpen-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)Open-Weights System Card + Customizable Guardrail Layer (Llama Guard / ShieldGemma)
Enterprise Compliance (ZDR/HIPAA/SOC2)100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control100% Air-Gapped On-Premises / Private VPC · Full HIPAA, GDPR & SOC2 Control
Input Modalitiestexttext
Output Modalitiestexttext

Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.1 405B: 핵심 요약 문답 (FAQ)

Which is more intelligent, Llama 3.1 70B or Llama 3.1 405B?

Llama 3.1 70B is more intelligent. It scores 75 compared with 48 on the composite Intelligence Index.

Which model is faster?

Llama 3.1 70B is faster, generating 75 tokens per second compared with 50 tokens per second.

Which model is cheaper to run?

Llama 3.1 70B is cheaper at $0.00 per 1M tokens blended, compared with $0.53 (7:2:1 cache:input:output ratio).

Which model has lower latency?

Llama 3.1 70B has lower latency, with a time to first token of 0.40s compared with 0.85s.

종합 평가

Verdict & Model Selection Recommendation: Choose Llama 3.1 70B if your priority is Self-hosted corporate chatbots, private document indexing, and code generation. Its performance in demanding tasks justifies its operational token cost. Choose Llama 3.1 405B if your workflow prioritizes Synthetic data generation, smaller model distillation, national sovereign AI, and air-gapped defense labs. For large-scale batch processing or customer-facing conversational interfaces, its balance of speed and economics delivers superior ROI.

자주 묻는 질문 (FAQ)

How does Llama 3.1 70B compare to Llama 3.1 405B in API token pricing and cost per token?+

Both Llama 3.1 70B and Llama 3.1 405B are open-weights foundation models available at $0.00 direct API cost when self-hosted, or offered at identical baseline rates across major inference providers. Model selection depends on GPU deployment sizing and specialized benchmark performance rather than raw token price. Both models support prompt caching discounts of up to 90% for repeated prompt prefixes.

Which model has a larger context window: Llama 3.1 70B or Llama 3.1 405B?+

Both Llama 3.1 70B and Llama 3.1 405B offer an identical context window of 128K tokens (~96k words). Both architectures provide equal capacity for large document ingestion, multi-file codebases, and extended multi-turn conversation histories.

Which AI model is better for software engineering and coding: Llama 3.1 70B or Llama 3.1 405B?+

Llama 3.1 70B scores 42% on SWE-bench Verified while Llama 3.1 405B scores 41.5%. For autonomous software engineering and multi-file debugging, Llama 3.1 70B holds the verified benchmark lead.

What is the difference in reasoning capability and extended thinking between Llama 3.1 70B and Llama 3.1 405B?+

Llama 3.1 70B is optimized for low-latency direct generation. In contrast, Llama 3.1 405B focuses on standard fast inference.

How does inference speed (tokens per second) compare between Llama 3.1 70B and Llama 3.1 405B?+

Llama 3.1 70B generates approximately 75 tokens per second, while Llama 3.1 405B delivers 50 tokens per second. In latency-sensitive production environments, Llama 3.1 70B provides faster time-to-first-token (TTFT) and higher streaming response velocity.

Can you implement a tiered LLM routing setup combining Llama 3.1 70B and Llama 3.1 405B to optimize costs?+

Yes! Tiered multi-model routing can optimize for latency and accuracy: you can route high-frequency conversational turns and latency-sensitive queries to Llama 3.1 70B, and route deep architectural or complex reasoning queries to Llama 3.1 70B. This balanced routing strategy maximizes system throughput and answer quality.

AI Terminology & Guide
Explore Glossary →

Understand key metrics like context window, token pricing, reasoning mode, and SWE-bench scores in our comprehensive AI glossary.

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.

공식 출처: GetInfoUs Independent AI Benchmarks & Official API Specs