Llama 3.3 70B Instruct vs Mistral Nemo
How do these models stack up? Below is an expert side-by-side comparison of specifications, context window capacity, live pricing per million tokens, and standardized benchmark scores for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct and Mistral Nemo.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Meta's state-of-the-art open weights model, providing enterprise-grade reasoning and logic. Exceptionally powerful for self-hosted customer support, text generation, and tooling workflows.
Mistral Nemo
A 12B parameter model with a 128k token context length built by Mistral in collaboration with NVIDIA. The model is multilingual, supporting English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Chinese, Japanese,...
Technical Specifications
| Specification | Llama 3.3 70B Instruct | Mistral Nemo |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Mistral |
| Context Window | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Agent Suitability | 83/100 | N/A |
| Time to First Token (TTFT) | 280 ms | N/A |
| Deployment Model | self hostable | self hostable |
| Production Stability | stable | stable |
| API Available | Yes | Yes |
| Released Date | 2024-12-06 | 2024-07-19 |
API Pricing Comparison
Input Price per Million Tokens
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
$0.10
Mistral Nemo
$0.02
Output Price per Million Tokens
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
$0.32
Mistral Nemo
$0.03
Want to test both models live?
Run side-by-side prompt prompts in our dynamic Sandbox. Check execution speeds, latency metrics, and compute actual costs in real-time.
Benchmark Performance Metrics
Scores show the raw performance percentages verified across key evaluation suites. Higher bars indicate superior accuracy and capability in that domain.
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct Quirks & Gotchas
- ▸Stable, well-documented self-hosted option with strong community support
- ▸Outperformed by Llama 4 Maverick for agentic tool-calling workflows
Mistral Nemo Quirks & Gotchas
No developer gotchas reported.