Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 52× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 5.5 Anthropic

68.6

Rank #3 Confirmed

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct Meta

30.6

Rank #291 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 5.5 leads 91.8 to 15.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 100% for Claude Opus 5.5 and 5.1% for Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.32 per million input/output tokens, against $4 / $20 for Claude Opus 5.5.
  • Claude Opus 5.5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index68.630.6
Released2026-09-222024-12-06
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K4K
Input $ / M tokens$4$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$20$0.32
Results tracked4443

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 71.9 (#3), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 31.0 (#290)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
SciCode66.9%26%
LMArena Coding15471268
FrontierCode54.6%—
CursorBench57.8%—
LMArena WebDev1813—
FrontierSWE62.3%—
WeirdML—14.4%
BigCodeBench Instruct—46.9%
LiveBench Coding—36.6%
MirrorCode77.4%—
BigCodeBench Complete—57.5%
ALE-Bench2,147—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 45.3 (#15), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 25.8 (#105)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
APEX-Agents73.5%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—31.9%
BALROG—23%
GDP.pdf30.6%—
Vending-Bench 29,235—

Reasoning Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.2 (#3), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 14.1 (#327)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
CritPt31.7%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts15351257
DTBench98.9%59.5%
LMCA68.2%17.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index167.33127.33
ARC-AGI-293.3%—
SimpleBench—19.9%
NYT Connections (extended)88.5%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
EBR-Bench71.4%—
LiveBench Reasoning—50.8%
Mystery Game Puzzles71%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.5%
ForecastBench—58.6
LiveBench—50.2%

Math Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 91.8 (#3), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 15.3 (#298)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%5.1%
LMArena Math15061267
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)91.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 495%—
ProofBench100%—
LiveBench Math—42.2%
MATH Level 5—41.6%
FrontierMath Erdős2.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 66.4 (#10), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 30.6 (#226)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
GPQA Diamond90.6%47.4%
LMArena Expert15471225
SimpleQA Verified72.2%—
Confabulations—22.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—4.1%
MMLU—86.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 5.5: 57.8 (#1), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Vision1321—
Blueprint-Bench 251.2%—
Furniture Assembly83.3%—

Multilingual Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 59.1 (#2), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 39.9 (#220)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Non-English15071236
LMArena Chinese15881217
LMArena French15141281
LMArena Russian15201252
LMArena Spanish15071270
LMArena German—1251
LMArena Japanese—1150
LMArena Korean—1143

Instruction Following Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 80.0 (#3), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 71.1 (#157)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following15371242
LiveBench Instruction Following—82.7%

Long Context Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 47.1 (#19), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 26.4 (#295)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Longer Query15321256
Fiction.LiveBench—33.3%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5.5 leads

Claude Opus 5.5: 78.2 (#3), Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct: 47.6 (#207)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 5.5Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct
LMArena Text15151274
LMArena Creative Writing15331250
LMArena Multi-Turn14991280
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2050—
LiveBench Language—39.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 5.5 better than Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Claude Opus 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.6 to 30.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct costs 52× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct?

Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.32 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 lists at $4 and $20.

Is Claude Opus 5.5 or Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct better for coding?

Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 71.9 versus 31.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5.5 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 5.5 and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 5.5 has 44 scored results on Noometry and Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct has 43.

Related comparisons

Go deeper