Model comparison

Llama 3.1-70B vs Nova 2.0 Pro Preview

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.8 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1-70B Meta

29.4

Rank #299 Confirmed

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview Amazon

32.8

Rank #241 Reported

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where Nova 2.0 Pro Preview leads 40.2 to 29.8.
  • Llama 3.1-70B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.1-70B and Nova 2.0 Pro Preview specifications
Llama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
ProviderMetaAmazon
Noometry Index29.432.8
Released2024-07-232025-12-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window128K—
Max output4K—
Input $ / M tokens$0.40—
Output $ / M tokens$0.40—
Results tracked353

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

Category by category

Coding Nova 2.0 Pro Preview leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 29.8 (#292), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 40.2 (#130)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
SciCode—42.7%
WeirdML9%—
BigCodeBench Instruct46.1%—
LMArena Coding1260—
BigCodeBench Complete54.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Llama 3.1-70B leads

Llama 3.1-70B: 24.9 (#104), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 21.9 (#127)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
TheAgentCompany6.9%—
BALROG27.9%—
GDP.pdf—2%

Reasoning Too close to call

Llama 3.1-70B: 20.8 (#215), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 21.7 (#189)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
CritPt—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1241—
DTBench60%—
LMCA14.8%—
Epoch Capabilities Index125.91—

Math Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 12.7 (#298), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-20253.6%—
Omni-MATH21%—
LMArena Math1252—
MATH Level 536.7%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 24.1 (#264), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
GPQA Diamond44.2%—
MMLU-Pro65.3%—
GPQA (HELM)42.6%—
LMArena Expert1209—
MMLU80.1%—

Multilingual Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 38.9 (#220), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
LMArena Non-English1219—
LMArena Chinese1215—
LMArena French1260—
LMArena German1222—
LMArena Japanese1132—
LMArena Korean1140—
LMArena Russian1234—
LMArena Spanish1253—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 65.5 (#218), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
IFEval82.1%—
LMArena Instruction Following1231—

Long Context Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#208), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
LMArena Longer Query1241—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Llama 3.1-70B: 35.6 (#262), Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkLlama 3.1-70BNova 2.0 Pro Preview
LMArena Text1261—
LMArena Creative Writing1232—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing784—
WildBench75.8%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1256—

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1-70B better than Nova 2.0 Pro Preview?

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview is the stronger model overall, scoring 32.8 to 29.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1-70B or Nova 2.0 Pro Preview better for coding?

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.2 versus 29.8 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-70B and Nova 2.0 Pro Preview share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-70B has 35 scored results on Noometry and Nova 2.0 Pro Preview has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper