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. | 16k | 8k |
| 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. | — | $30.00 |
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. | — | $60.00 |
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. | — | $30.00Azure |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $60.00Azure |
| — | $9,000OpenAI list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
HumanEvalFunction synthesis — 164 small Python problems: the AI is given a function's description and has to write the working function. This was the coding benchmark of the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 era, before the field moved to fixing real bugs in real repositories. Higher is better. | — | 67% |
MMLUGeneral knowledge — A 57-subject multiple-choice exam — history, law, medicine, maths — that was the standard measure of how much a model knows from 2020 until roughly 2024, when frontier scores crowded into the high 80s and labs moved on to harder tests. The scores here were published years apart under different testing setups, so read them as a historical record rather than a like-for-like ranking. Higher is better. | — | 86.4% |
GSM8KGrade-school math — Grade-school maths word problems that take a few steps of arithmetic to work through. It separated the models of 2022 and 2023 sharply, then saturated. One caveat on the historical numbers: OpenAI included part of the GSM8K training set in GPT-4's pre-training mix, so GPT-4's score is not a clean few-shot result. Higher is better. | — | 92% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | OpenAI |
| Release date | Jan 29 2024 | Mar 14 2023 |
| Access | Open Weight | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Code Llama 70BvsClaude Haiku 5.5GPT-4vsClaude Haiku 5.5Code Llama 70BvsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-4vsGemini 4 ArgonCode Llama 70BvsGrok 4.7GPT-4vsGrok 4.7Code Llama 70BvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017GPT-4vsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Code Llama 70BvsMistral Large 4GPT-4vsMistral Large 4Code Llama 70BvsKimi K3GPT-4vsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Code Llama 70B and GPT-4 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only GPT-4 has a verified first-party API price: $30.00 per million input tokens and $60.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Code Llama 70B. GPT-4 shipped 321 days before Code Llama 70B, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 16k (Code Llama 70B) vs 8k (GPT-4). Code Llama 70B is open weight, while GPT-4 is closed.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Code Llama 70B and GPT-4 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.