ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama-3.2-1B vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct comes out ahead, 46 to 36 on our weighted score, though Llama-3.2-1B is 7.3× cheaper per token.

  1. Meta

    Llama-3.2-1B

    Released Sep 25, 2024

    36/100
    • ECI102.0
    • Price$0.064 / $0.15
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Llama-3.2-1B
  2. Our pick

    Meta

    Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

    Released Dec 6, 2024

    46/100
    • ECI127.3
    • Price$0.59 / $0.724
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is our pick

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 46/100 against Llama-3.2-1B (36). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Llama-3.2-1B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityLlama-3.3-70B-InstructCapabilities Index (ECI): Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct 127.3 · Llama-3.2-1B 102.0
  • Lowest priceLlama-3.2-1BLlama-3.2-1B $0.085 · Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct $0.624 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextLlama-3.2-1BLlama-3.2-1B 131,072 · Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsLlama-3.2-1B: Text · Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.2-1BLlama-3.3-70B-Instruct
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%1749
Price25%10060
Inputs & features15%025
Context window10%2424
Overall100%36/10046/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Llama-3.2-1B vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.2-1BMetaLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)102.0127.3 (best)
ECI rank#147 of 148#133 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions23.9%47.4% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics0.6%5.1% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.064 (best)$0.59
Output$0.15 (best)$0.724
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.085 (best)$0.624
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 2 providersMedian of 21 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens (best)4,096 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingNoYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenLlama 3.2 Community LicenseOpen
API model ID—llama-3.3-70b-instruct
API providers224 (best)
ReleasedSep 25, 2024Dec 6, 2024
Knowledge cutoffDec 2023Dec 2023
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Llama-3.2-1B$0.936
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct$7.35
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama-3.2-1B or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 46/100 against Llama-3.2-1B (36). It leads on capability and inputs & features. Llama-3.2-1B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Llama-3.2-1B or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Llama-3.2-1B is cheaper at $0.064 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs $0.59 input / $0.724 output per million tokens (median across 21 API providers; free on Llama). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.085 per million tokens for Llama-3.2-1B versus $0.624 for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct (7.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct 127.3 (#133 of 148) and Llama-3.2-1B 102.0 (#147 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (122.5–129.5 vs 90.7–110.3), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct 47.4%, Llama-3.2-1B 23.9%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct 5.1%, Llama-3.2-1B 0.6%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama-3.2-1B and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Note that Llama-3.2-1B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Llama-3.2-1B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct. Maximum output per response: Llama-3.2-1B up to 8,192, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct up to 4,096 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.2-1B accepts text; Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Llama 3.2 Community License), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is the newest, released Dec 6, 2024. Llama-3.2-1B came out Sep 25, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Llama-3.2-1B Dec 2023, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Dec 2023.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons