Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Llama 3.1 70B vs Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 benchmark

Name: Llama 3.1 70B vs Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Llama 3.1 70B (Meta) and Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 (amazon) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 wins on output price at $0.14/1M. Llama 3.1 70B has the larger context window (131k 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

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.

Llama 3.1 70B (7)vsAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0 (2)

Llama 3.1 70B: 7W (78%)Overall: Llama 3.1 70BAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 2W (22%)

← Llama 3.1 70BAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0 →

Llama 3.1 70B (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

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

Preference Elo

1,240vs—

Coding Elo

—vs—

SWE-bench

40.2%vs—

LiveBench

46.8%vs—

GPQA Diamond

48%vs—

Llama 3.1 70B: 4WAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 0W

Llama 3.1 70B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

125 tok/svs—

Time to first token

170 msvs—

Llama 3.1 70B: 2WAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 0W

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$0.4/1Mvs$0.14/1M

Input price

$0.4/1Mvs$0.04/1M

Context window

131kvs128k

Llama 3.1 70B: 1WAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 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 AdvantageLlama 3.1 70B 5/6

Preference Elo

No shared data

Throughput Speed

No shared data

Price Efficiency

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0

$0.26/1M cheaper

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Elo

High is better

1,240

EloHigh is better

—

LiveBench

High is better

46.8%

LiveBenchHigh is better

—

SWE-bench

High is better

40.2%

SWE-benchHigh is better

—

GPQA

High is better

48%

GPQAHigh is better

—

TTFT

Low is better

170 ms

TTFTLow is better

—

Speed

High is better

125 tok/s

SpeedHigh is better

—

In $

Low is better

$0.4/1M

In $Low is better

$0.04/1M+1043%

Out $

Low is better

$0.4/1M

Out $Low is better

$0.14/1M+186%

Context

High is better

+2%131k

ContextHigh is better

128k

Interactive Simulator

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

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

Save up to 83% with Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0

Monthly Volume50M tokens/mo

Quick Presets:

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

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

Llama 3.1 70B$20.00 / mo

In: $14.00Out: $6.00

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0$3.33 / mo

In: $1.23Out: $2.10

Estimated Cost Delta

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 is estimated to save $16.67/month ($200/year).

Based on 50M tokens (30% gen)

Key Selection Recommendations

1
Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0:Pick Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 when you are optimizing output cost.

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0

Lower output list price ($0.14/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGLlama 3.1 70B

Larger window (131k).

Screenshots / visionAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0	Lower output list price ($0.14/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Llama 3.1 70B	Larger window (131k).
Screenshots / vision	Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0	Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

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/llama-3-1-70b-vs-nova-micro-v1/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Llama 3.1 70B

Elo 1,240

LiveBench46.8%

SWE-bench40.2%

Speed125 tok/s

Output cost$0.4/1M

amazon

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost$0.14/1M

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Llama 3.1 70B or Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Llama 3.1 70B or Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 output tokens are $0.14/1M versus $0.4/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.
Which is faster, Llama 3.1 70B or Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Llama 3.1 70B accepts 131k tokens versus 128k.
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. Llama 3.1 70B and Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Llama 3.1 70B matchups →|All Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 matchups →

Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.1 405B (previous llama)Llama 3.1 70B vs Llama 3.3 70B (next llama)Llama 4 Maverick vs Llama 3.1 70B Llama 4 Scout vs Llama 3.1 70B Claude Opus 4.5 vs Llama 3.1 70B Claude Opus 4.6 vs Llama 3.1 70B

Llama 3.1 70B vs Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 benchmark

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Llama 3.1 70B (7)vsAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0 (2)

Llama 3.1 70B: 7W (78%)Overall: Llama 3.1 70BAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 2W (22%)

← Llama 3.1 70BAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0 →

Llama 3.1 70B (4/5)

Intelligence & Reasoning

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

Preference Elo

1,240vs—

Coding Elo

—vs—

SWE-bench

40.2%vs—

LiveBench

46.8%vs—

GPQA Diamond

48%vs—

Llama 3.1 70B: 4WAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 0W

Llama 3.1 70B (2/2)

Speed & Latency

Generation throughput and time to first token responsiveness

Output speed

125 tok/svs—

Time to first token

170 msvs—

Llama 3.1 70B: 2WAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 0W

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 (2/3)

Pricing & Capacity

Cost per million tokens and max context window length

Output price

$0.4/1Mvs$0.14/1M

Input price

$0.4/1Mvs$0.04/1M

Context window

131kvs128k

Llama 3.1 70B: 1WAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0: 2W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0

Lower output list price ($0.14/1M).

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGLlama 3.1 70B

Larger window (131k).

Screenshots / visionAmazon: Nova Micro 1.0

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0	Lower output list price ($0.14/1M).
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	Llama 3.1 70B	Larger window (131k).
Screenshots / vision	Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0	Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Llama 3.1 70B or Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, Llama 3.1 70B or Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 output tokens are $0.14/1M versus $0.4/1M. Input prices and retry rates still move the real bill.

Which is faster, Llama 3.1 70B or Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Llama 3.1 70B accepts 131k tokens versus 128k.

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. Llama 3.1 70B and Amazon: Nova Micro 1.0 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.