Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.1 vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 194× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.1 Anthropic

41.0

Rank #142 Confirmed

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.6

Rank #291 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 32.2 to 14.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 68.9% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 5.1% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.32 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
  • Claude Opus 4.1 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index41.030.6
Released2025-08-052024-12-06
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window200K128K
Max output32K4K
Input $ / M tokens$15$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$75$0.32
Results tracked4843

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 31.0 (#290)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
WeirdML45.9%14.4%
LMArena Coding14791268
SWE-bench Verified73.3%—
LMArena WebDev1390—
SciCode—26%
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.9%
LiveBench Coding—36.6%
BigCodeBench Complete—57.5%
ALE-Bench674.77—
AlgoTune1.34—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.8 (#105)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
Terminal-Bench38%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—31.9%
GDPval43.6%—
Cybench42%—
DeepResearch Bench48.3%—
BALROG—23%
LMArena Search1148—
METR Time Horizons66.8%—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.1 (#327)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
SimpleBench60%19.9%
LMArena Hard Prompts14431257
DTBench80%59.5%
LMCA37.1%17.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index144.12127.33
ForecastBench6258.6
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles7%—
EnigmaEval7.2%—
EBR-Bench7.9%—
LiveBench Reasoning—50.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles21%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.5%
LiveBench—50.2%

Math Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 15.3 (#298)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202568.9%5.1%
LMArena Math14311267
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)12.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
LiveBench Math—42.2%
MATH Level 5—41.6%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)7.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#226)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
GPQA Diamond77.3%47.4%
Confabulations17.1%22.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate11.8%4.1%
LMArena Expert14391225
Humanity's Last Exam11.5%—
MMLU—86.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
VPCT35%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 39.9 (#220)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Non-English14051236
LMArena Chinese14271217
LMArena French14311281
LMArena German14131251
LMArena Japanese13781150
LMArena Korean13801143
LMArena Russian14221252
LMArena Spanish14481270

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.1 (#157)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14351242
LiveBench Instruction Following—82.7%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#295)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14551256
Fiction.LiveBench—33.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.1 leads

Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.6 (#207)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.1Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Text14191274
LMArena Creative Writing14121250
LMArena Multi-Turn14441280
Short-Story Creative Writing84.7%—
LiveBench Language—39.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 194× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.32 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

Is Claude Opus 4.1 or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.4 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.1 does, with 200K tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.1 and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper