Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B: The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B comparison will break down every critical metric to help you make the best decision.

Explore best-for scenarios•Let the AI Selector recommend next steps

Model Snapshot

Key decision metrics at a glance.

Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)

Anthropic

Reasoning: 9
Coding: 5
Multimodal: 4
Long Context: 6
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.010
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 80.653tokens/sec

Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)` vs `Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B debate, Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) scores 90 against Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B's 10. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)300ms

Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B300ms

Tokens per Second

Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning)80.653

Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B61.266

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B

Power is only one part of the equation. This Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) would cost $0.011, whereas Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B would cost $0.001. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B Battle for You?

Choose Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) if...

Your top priority is raw performance and capability.

You are working in a technical or scientific field requiring the highest accuracy.

Cost is a secondary concern to power in your Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B decision.

Choose Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B if...

You need a highly responsive model for user-facing applications.

Your budget is a primary consideration in the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B choice.

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the Claude Opus 4.5 (Reasoning) vs Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/