Skip to main content

GPT-4o mini vs Llama 3.1 70B

Compare OpenAI and Meta (via Together AI) AI models

OpenAI
GPT-4o mini
vs
Meta (via Together AI)
Llama 3.1 70B

Cost Comparison (1000 input + 500 output tokens, 100 requests/day)

GPT-4o mini

Per Request:$0.000450
Daily:$0.045
Monthly:$1.35
Yearly:$16.425

Llama 3.1 70B

Per Request:$0.001320
Daily:$0.132
Monthly:$3.96
Yearly:$48.18

Cost Differences

+$0.000870
Per Request
+$0.087
Daily
+$2.61
Monthly
+$31.755
Yearly

Llama 3.1 70B costs more than GPT-4o mini

Feature Comparison

FeatureGPT-4o miniLlama 3.1 70B
ProviderOpenAIMeta (via Together AI)
Input Price$0.15/1M tokens$0.88/1M tokens
Output Price$0.60/1M tokens$0.88/1M tokens
Context Window128,000 tokens128,000 tokens
Max Output16,384 tokens32,768 tokens
Categoryefficientbalanced
Capabilities
textvision
textcode
Release Date7/18/20247/23/2024

GPT-4o mini vs Llama 3.1 70B: Which Should You Choose?

Choosing between GPT-4o mini and Llama 3.1 70B depends on your priorities: cost efficiency, context length, or raw capability. GPT-4o mini is the more affordable option at $0.15/1M input tokens83% cheaper than Llama 3.1 70B.

These models come from different providers — OpenAI and Meta (via Together AI) — which means different API ecosystems, SDKs, rate limits, and terms of service. If you're already integrated with OpenAI, switching to Meta (via Together AI)involves migration effort beyond just pricing. Factor in your existing infrastructure when deciding.

These models target different tiers: GPT-4o mini is a efficient model while Llama 3.1 70B is balanced. This means they're optimized for different workloads. Llama 3.1 70B targets more demanding workloads, while GPT-4o mini provides a cost-effective option for everyday tasks.

Output costs matter too. GPT-4o mini charges $0.60/1M output tokens vs $0.88 for Llama 3.1 70B. For generation-heavy workloads (content creation, code generation, summarization), output pricing often dominates your bill. GPT-4o mini has the edge here at $0.60/1M output tokens.

Multimodal capabilities: GPT-4o mini supports vision (image inputs) while Llama 3.1 70B is text-only. If your application needs image understanding, this narrows your choice.

Best Use Cases

Choose GPT-4o mini when:

  • • Budget is a primary concern
  • • You're already using OpenAI's API ecosystem
  • • You're running high-volume, latency-sensitive workloads

Choose Llama 3.1 70B when:

  • • You need longer outputs (up to 32,768 tokens)
  • • You're already using Meta (via Together AI)'s API ecosystem

Try Different Scenarios

Use the calculator below to see how costs change with different usage patterns

GPT-4o mini (OpenAI)

Llama 3.1 70B (Meta (via Together AI))

Start using GPT-4o mini today

Sign Up for OpenAI

Start using Llama 3.1 70B today

Sign Up for Meta (via Together AI)

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o mini or Llama 3.1 70B?
GPT-4o mini is cheaper for input tokens at $0.15 per million tokens vs $0.88 for Llama 3.1 70B — that's 83% savings on input costs.
What is the context window difference between GPT-4o mini and Llama 3.1 70B?
GPT-4o mini supports 128,000 tokens while Llama 3.1 70B supports 128,000 tokens — a difference of 0 tokens in favor of GPT-4o mini.
Which model is better for AI Chatbot?
Both models support text. For ai chatbot, GPT-4o mini is the lower-cost option, while GPT-4o mini offers a larger context window (128,000 vs 128,000 tokens). Choose GPT-4o mini for budget sensitivity or GPT-4o mini for longer context tasks.
Which model has better overall pricing for heavy usage?
At 100 requests/day with 1,000 input and 500 output tokens each, GPT-4o mini costs about $1.35/month and Llama 3.1 70B costs about $3.96/month. Overall, GPT-4o mini has lower combined input + output rates ($0.15 in, $0.60 out) vs Llama 3.1 70B.

Related Comparisons

Related Articles