Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5 vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 65× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5 Anthropic

67.8

Rank #4 Confirmed

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.6

Rank #291 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5 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 math, where Claude Opus 5 leads 86.2 to 15.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 98.9% for Claude Opus 5 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 $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 5.
  • Claude Opus 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index67.830.6
Released2026-07-242024-12-06
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K4K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.32
Results tracked5743

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 31.0 (#290)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
SciCode56.4%26%
WeirdML91.8%14.4%
LMArena Coding15341268
DeepSWE73.6%—
FrontierCode53.4%—
CursorBench46.6%—
LMArena WebDev1691—
FrontierSWE52%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.9%
LiveBench Coding—36.6%
BigCodeBench Complete—57.5%
ALE-Bench2,165—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.8 (#105)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
BALROG63.4%23%
APEX-Agents65.8%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—31.9%
OSWorld 2.031.4%—
τ²-bench Banking48.7%—
PostTrainBench35%—
GBAEval79.6%—
GDP.pdf24%—
Vending-Bench 211,182—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 77.2 (#4), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.1 (#327)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
SimpleBench80.6%19.9%
CritPt29.1%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts15261257
DTBench97.9%59.5%
LMCA64.5%17.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index162.78127.33
ARC-AGI-290.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)94.3%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
Chess Puzzles42%—
EBR-Bench45.7%—
LiveBench Reasoning—50.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles59%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.5%
Bench to the Future 30.12—
ForecastBench—58.6
LiveBench—50.2%

Math Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 86.2 (#8), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 15.3 (#298)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.9%5.1%
LMArena Math15311267
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)85.6%—
FrontierMath Tier 473.2%—
ProofBench99%—
LiveBench Math—42.2%
MATH Level 5—41.6%

Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#9), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#226)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
GPQA Diamond93.9%47.4%
LMArena Expert15571225
SimpleQA Verified59.9%—
Confabulations—22.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—4.1%
MMLU—86.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Vision1319—
Blueprint-Bench 230.4%—
Furniture Assembly60.8%—
LMArena Document1516—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 39.9 (#220)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Non-English15011236
LMArena Chinese15741217
LMArena French15191281
LMArena German15241251
LMArena Japanese15161150
LMArena Korean15211143
LMArena Russian15071252
LMArena Spanish15191270

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.1 (#157)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following15171242
LiveBench Instruction Following—82.7%

Long Context Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#295)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Longer Query15151256
Fiction.LiveBench—33.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads

Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.6 (#207)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Text15071274
LMArena Creative Writing14911250
LMArena Multi-Turn14991280
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2133—
EQ-Bench 41385—
LiveBench Language—39.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5 better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Claude Opus 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 67.8 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 65× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 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 5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 5 or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?

Claude Opus 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.5 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5 and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper