Directory · Model comparison
GPT-4.1 vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Side-by-side API economics and benchmarks. Per-1M input and output rates, context window, and verified metrics.
Tale of the tape
Head-to-head specs pulled from each model profile.
| Metric | GPT-4.1 | Llama 3.1 70B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Input cost / 1M | $2.00 | $0.40 |
| Output cost / 1M | $8.00 | $0.40 |
| Context window | 1,047,576 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| MMLU score | — | 83.6% |
Cost verdict
Enter monthly input and output volumes to see total cost savings.
GPT-4.1
- Input: 1M × $2.00 = $2.00
- Output: 1M × $8.00 = $8.00
- Total
- $10.00
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
- Input: 1M × $0.40 = $0.40
- Output: 1M × $0.40 = $0.40
- Total
- $0.80
Total cost savings
$9.20
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct saves $9.20 per month vs the other model at this volume.
Model routing savings
Uses this page's verified rates. GPT-4.1 is the premium route (higher combined per-1M cost); Llama 3.1 70B Instruct handles routine traffic.
All premium
GPT-4.1
$500.00
100% of input and output on the premium route
Routed stack
80% → Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
20% → GPT-4.1
$132.00
- Routine slice
- $32.00
- Premium slice
- $100.00
Monthly savings
$368.00
73.6% lower
Rates pulled from this page's model database entries (gpt-4-1, llama-3-1-70b-instruct) — same per-1M input/output figures as Tale of the tape. Production routing needs quality gates and monitoring.
Related comparisons
More head-to-head model matchups.