ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

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

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. 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

  2. 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

  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-3.3-70B-Instruct: Text · Llama-3.2-1B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama-3.3-70B-InstructLlama-3.2-1B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%4917
Price25%60100
Inputs & features15%250
Context window10%2424
Overall100%46/10036/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct vs Llama-3.2-1B specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama-3.3-70B-InstructMetaLlama-3.2-1BMeta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)127.3 (best)102.0
ECI rank#133 of 148 (best)#147 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions47.4% (best)23.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics5.1% (best)0.6%
Price per million tokens
Input$0.59$0.064 (best)
Output$0.724$0.15 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.624$0.085 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 21 providersMedian of 2 providers
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output4,096 tokens8,192 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Tool callingYesNo
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenLlama 3.2 Community License
API model IDllama-3.3-70b-instruct—
API providers24 (best)2
ReleasedDec 6, 2024Sep 25, 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-3.3-70B-Instruct$7.35
  • Llama-3.2-1B$0.936
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

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-3.3-70B-Instruct or Llama-3.2-1B?

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-3.3-70B-Instruct and Llama-3.2-1B 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-3.3-70B-Instruct up to 4,096, Llama-3.2-1B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct accepts text; Llama-3.2-1B 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-3.3-70B-Instruct Dec 2023, Llama-3.2-1B 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