Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | — | 70B |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 1M | 16k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $0.30 | — |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $2.50 | — |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.03 | — |
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.15Google AI Studio | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $1.25Google AI Studio | — |
| $185Google list price | — | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 19% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | |
| Release date | Apr 17 2025 | Jan 29 2024 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Gemini 2.5 FlashvsClaude Haiku 5.5Code Llama 70BvsClaude Haiku 5.5Gemini 2.5 FlashvsGPT-6.1 SolCode Llama 70BvsGPT-6.1 SolGemini 2.5 FlashvsGrok 4.7Code Llama 70BvsGrok 4.7Gemini 2.5 FlashvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Code Llama 70BvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Gemini 2.5 FlashvsMistral Large 4Code Llama 70BvsMistral Large 4Gemini 2.5 FlashvsKimi K3Code Llama 70BvsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Gemini 2.5 Flash and Code Llama 70B don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only Gemini 2.5 Flash has a verified first-party API price: $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Code Llama 70B. Code Llama 70B shipped 444 days before Gemini 2.5 Flash, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Gemini 2.5 Flash) vs 16k (Code Llama 70B). Gemini 2.5 Flash is closed, while Code Llama 70B is open weight.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Gemini 2.5 Flash and Code Llama 70B don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.