Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Anthropic
Anthropic
vs
Meta-llama
Meta-llama

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Claude Opus 4.6 wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision
  • Has reasoning mode

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
Price Advantage
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Benchmark Advantage
Claude Opus 4.6
Context Window
Claude Opus 4.6
Speed
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LicenseProprietaryOpen Source
AuthorAnthropicMeta-llama
ReleasedFeb 2026Dec 2024

Claude Opus 4.6 Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Llama 3.3 70B Instruct has cheaper input pricing at $0.12/M tokens. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct has cheaper output pricing at $0.38/M tokens.
Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 47.6, compared to Llama 3.3 70B Instruct's score of 10.7.
Claude Opus 4.6 has a 1,000,000 token context window, while Llama 3.3 70B Instruct has a 131,072 token context window.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports vision. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct does not support vision.