Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 16, 2026

GPT-5 vs Llama 3.1 70B benchmark

Name: GPT-5 vs Llama 3.1 70B AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares GPT-5 (OpenAI) and Llama 3.1 70B (Meta) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 16, 2026. On preference Elo, GPT-5 is ahead by 318 points (1,558 vs 1,240; seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). On SWE-bench coding, GPT-5 resolves 68.4% versus 40.2% (seed-bootstrap (Aug 1, 2026)). Llama 3.1 70B streams faster (125 tok/s) while Llama 3.1 70B is the cheaper output token ($0.4/1M). GPT-5 has the larger context window (400k tokens). Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

OpenAI

GPT-5

OpenAI flagship reasoning model for 2025–26. Strong general preference Elo and multimodal coverage.

Elo 1,558$10/1M out

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

GPT-5 (6)vsLlama 3.1 70B (4)

GPT-5: 6W (60%)Overall: GPT-5Llama 3.1 70B: 4W (40%)

← GPT-5Llama 3.1 70B →

GPT-5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,558vs1,240

Coding Elo

1,540vs—

SWE-bench

68.4%vs40.2%

LiveBench

69.8%vs46.8%

GPQA Diamond

85.2%vs48%

GPT-5: 5WLlama 3.1 70B: 0W

Llama 3.1 70B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

78 tok/svs125 tok/s

Time to first token

290 msvs170 ms

GPT-5: 0WLlama 3.1 70B: 2W

Llama 3.1 70B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$10/1Mvs$0.4/1M

Input price

$1.25/1Mvs$0.4/1M

Context window

400kvs131k

GPT-5: 1WLlama 3.1 70B: 2W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageGPT-5 4/6

Preference Elo

GPT-5

318 pts advantage

Throughput Speed

Llama 3.1 70B

47 tok/s faster

Price Efficiency

Llama 3.1 70B

$9.60/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

+26%1,558

EloHigh is better

1,240

Code Elo

High is better

1,540

Code EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

+49%69.8%

LiveBenchHigh is better

46.8%

SWE-bench

High is better

+70%68.4%

SWE-benchHigh is better

40.2%

GPQA

High is better

+78%85.2%

GPQAHigh is better

48%

TTFT

Low is better

290 ms

TTFTLow is better

170 ms+71%

Speed

High is better

78 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

125 tok/s+60%

In $

Low is better

$1.25/1M

In $Low is better

$0.4/1M+213%

Out $

Low is better

$10/1M

Out $Low is better

$0.4/1M+2400%

Context

High is better

+205%400k

ContextHigh is better

131k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs based on published $/1M tokens.

Save up to 90% with Llama 3.1 70B

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

Token Ratio (In vs Out)70% In / 30% Out

RAG / Search (10% out)Coding / Chat (50% out)

GPT-5$193.75 / mo

In: $43.75Out: $150.00

Llama 3.1 70B$20.00 / mo

In: $14.00Out: $6.00

Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.1 70B is estimated to save $173.75/month ($2,085/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
GPT-5:Pick GPT-5 when repo-level coding accuracy is the constraint.
2
Llama 3.1 70B:Pick Llama 3.1 70B when you are optimizing output cost.
3
Llama 3.1 70B:Pick Llama 3.1 70B when time-to-first-token matters more than peak Elo.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGPT-5

Higher SWE-bench (68.4%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 70B

Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.1 70B

Lower TTFT (170 ms).

Long-document RAGGPT-5

Larger window (400k).

Screenshots / visionGPT-5

GPT-5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	GPT-5	Higher SWE-bench (68.4%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower TTFT (170 ms).
Long-document RAG	GPT-5	Larger window (400k).
Screenshots / vision	GPT-5	GPT-5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchAug 8, 2025

GPT-5 (2025) remains the legacy OpenAI flagship baseline

Still a common compare target. 5.6 Sol replaced it as the buy; GPT-5 stays for old URLs.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/gpt-5-vs-llama-3-1-70b/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

OpenAI

GPT-5

Elo 1,558

LiveBench69.8%

SWE-bench68.4%

Speed78 tok/s

Output cost$10/1M

Llama 3.1 70B

Elo 1,240

LiveBench46.8%

SWE-bench40.2%

Speed125 tok/s

Output cost$0.4/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, GPT-5 or Llama 3.1 70B?: GPT-5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,558). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.
Which is better at coding, GPT-5 or Llama 3.1 70B?: GPT-5 leads SWE-bench at 68.4% vs 40.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Llama 3.1 70B output tokens are $0.4/1M versus $10/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, GPT-5 or Llama 3.1 70B?: Llama 3.1 70B has the lower time-to-first-token (170 ms vs 290 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.
Which has the larger context window?: GPT-5 accepts 400k tokens versus 131k.
Can I self-host either model?: Llama 3.1 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. GPT-5 and Llama 3.1 70B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All GPT-5 matchups →|All Llama 3.1 70B matchups →

GPT-5 vs GPT-4.5 Orion (previous gpt-flagship)GPT-5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol (next gpt-flagship)Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.1 405B (previous llama)Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.3 70B (next llama)GPT-5.6 Terra vs GPT-5 Llama 4 Maverick vs GPT-5

GPT-5 vs Llama 3.1 70B benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

GPT-5 (6)vsLlama 3.1 70B (4)

GPT-5: 6W (60%)Overall: GPT-5Llama 3.1 70B: 4W (40%)

← GPT-5Llama 3.1 70B →

GPT-5 (5/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

Preference Elo, Coding proficiency, SWE-bench & LiveBench accuracy

Preference Elo

1,558vs1,240

Coding Elo

1,540vs—

SWE-bench

68.4%vs40.2%

LiveBench

69.8%vs46.8%

GPQA Diamond

85.2%vs48%

GPT-5: 5WLlama 3.1 70B: 0W

Llama 3.1 70B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

78 tok/svs125 tok/s

Time to first token

290 msvs170 ms

GPT-5: 0WLlama 3.1 70B: 2W

Llama 3.1 70B (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$10/1Mvs$0.4/1M

Input price

$1.25/1Mvs$0.4/1M

Context window

400kvs131k

GPT-5: 1WLlama 3.1 70B: 2W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsGPT-5

Higher SWE-bench (68.4%).

High-volume chatLlama 3.1 70B

Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).

Voice / low-latency UILlama 3.1 70B

Lower TTFT (170 ms).

Long-document RAGGPT-5

Larger window (400k).

Screenshots / visionGPT-5

GPT-5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	GPT-5	Higher SWE-bench (68.4%).
High-volume chat	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower output list price ($0.4/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	Llama 3.1 70B	Lower TTFT (170 ms).
Long-document RAG	GPT-5	Larger window (400k).
Screenshots / vision	GPT-5	GPT-5 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, GPT-5 or Llama 3.1 70B?

GPT-5 has the higher preference Elo in our latest snapshot (1,558). “Better” still depends on coding, price, and latency — see the table.

Which is better at coding, GPT-5 or Llama 3.1 70B?

GPT-5 leads SWE-bench at 68.4% vs 40.2%. SWE-bench is one harness, not your repo.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Llama 3.1 70B output tokens are $0.4/1M versus $10/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, GPT-5 or Llama 3.1 70B?

Llama 3.1 70B has the lower time-to-first-token (170 ms vs 290 ms). Tokens/sec is a separate column if you care about long completions.

Which has the larger context window?

GPT-5 accepts 400k tokens versus 131k.

Can I self-host either model?

Llama 3.1 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. GPT-5 and Llama 3.1 70B Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

GPT-5

Llama 3.1 70B

Llama 3.1 70B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

GPT-5 (2025) remains the legacy OpenAI flagship baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

GPT-5

Llama 3.1 70B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Intelligence & Reasoning

Speed & Latency

Pricing & Capacity

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

GPT-5

Llama 3.1 70B

Llama 3.1 70B

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Key Selection Recommendations

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

GPT-5 (2025) remains the legacy OpenAI flagship baseline

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

GPT-5

Llama 3.1 70B

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons