All models

Grok 4 Fast ≤128k vs Llama 3.1 70B

Side-by-side comparison of pricing and capabilities

Input Price Comparison

Grok 4 Fast ≤128k (Input)
$0.2
Llama 3.1 70B (Input)
$0.23
Grok 4 Fast ≤128k (Output)
$0.5
Llama 3.1 70B (Output)
$0.4
AttributeGrok 4 Fast ≤128kLlama 3.1 70B
ProviderxAIMeta
Input Price$0.2 /1M tokens$0.23 /1M tokens
Output Price$0.5 /1M tokens$0.4 /1M tokens
Cached Input$0.050 /1M tokens$0.023 /1M tokens
Context Window131K128K
Typechatchat
Statuscurrentcurrent

Capability Comparison

CapabilityGrok 4 Fast ≤128kLlama 3.1 70B
coding
multilingual

Which should you choose?

Budget-conscious: Grok 4 Fast ≤128k is 13% cheaper on input tokens ($0.2 vs $0.23 per 1M tokens).

Context-heavy tasks: Grok 4 Fast ≤128k offers a larger context window (131K vs 128K), making it better for long documents or conversations.

Capability fit: Grok 4 Fast ≤128k supports 1 capabilities (coding), while Llama 3.1 70B supports 2 (coding, multilingual).

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper: Grok 4 Fast ≤128k or Llama 3.1 70B?

Grok 4 Fast ≤128k costs $0.2/1M input vs Llama 3.1 70B at $0.23/1M input. Grok 4 Fast ≤128k is 13% cheaper on input tokens.

How do output prices compare between Grok 4 Fast ≤128k and Llama 3.1 70B?

Grok 4 Fast ≤128k output: $0.5/1M, Llama 3.1 70B output: $0.4/1M. Llama 3.1 70B is more economical for generation-heavy workloads.

What is Grok 4 Fast ≤128k best used for?

Grok 4 Fast ≤128k is best for budget-conscious applications, high-volume chatbots, and tasks where cost efficiency is the primary concern.

What is Llama 3.1 70B best used for?

Llama 3.1 70B is suited for complex reasoning, analysis, and tasks that benefit from its coding and multilingual capabilities.

Related Comparisons