Model comparison
Kimi K3 vs Llama 3.1-70B
Kimi K3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Kimi K3 scores higher in 9 categories and Llama 3.1-70B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Kimi K3 leads 74.2 to 13.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 97.2% for Kimi K3 and 3.6% for Llama 3.1-70B.
- Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper at $0.40 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Kimi K3.
- Kimi K3 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Moonshot AI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 59.5 | 29.6 |
| Released | 2026-07-16 | 2024-07-23 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | 1.05M | 128K |
| Max output | 1.05M | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 53 | 35 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 61.0 (#10), Llama 3.1-70B: 30.3 (#296)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 82.6% | 9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1508 | 1260 |
| DeepSWE | 68.5% | — |
| FrontierCode | 44.2% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1654 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 25.9% | — |
| SciCode | 59.5% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 46.1% |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 54.8% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,524 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 41.8 (#20), Llama 3.1-70B: 25.1 (#112)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 50.6% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 6.9% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 37.1% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 32% | — |
| BALROG | — | 27.9% |
| GBAEval | 48.3% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 19% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,165 | — |
Reasoning Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 63.0 (#17), Llama 3.1-70B: 21.6 (#220)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1496 | 1241 |
| DTBench | 91.2% | 60% |
| LMCA | 52.7% | 14.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 157.45 | 125.92 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 60.4% | — |
| SimpleBench | 60.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 93.6% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 94.5% | — |
| CritPt | 23.4% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 39% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 26% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 95% | — |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 74.2 (#16), Llama 3.1-70B: 13.5 (#304)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 97.2% | 3.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1491 | 1252 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 72.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 39% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 87.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 87% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 21% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 36.7% |
Knowledge Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 63.2 (#21), Llama 3.1-70B: 24.2 (#269)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 93.1% | 44.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1521 | 1209 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 50.6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 65.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 42.6% |
| MMLU | — | 80.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Kimi K3: 37.8 (#70), Llama 3.1-70B: —
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 29.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 34.2% | — |
Multilingual Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 56.3 (#21), Llama 3.1-70B: 38.8 (#225)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1466 | 1219 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1529 | 1215 |
| LMArena French | 1491 | 1261 |
| LMArena German | 1488 | 1222 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1487 | 1132 |
| LMArena Korean | 1458 | 1140 |
| LMArena Russian | 1482 | 1234 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1472 | 1253 |
Instruction Following Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 77.7 (#14), Llama 3.1-70B: 65.3 (#223)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1483 | 1231 |
| IFEval | — | 82.1% |
Long Context Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 45.8 (#29), Llama 3.1-70B: 37.6 (#214)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1494 | 1241 |
Writing & Preference Kimi K3 leads
Kimi K3: 76.6 (#4), Llama 3.1-70B: 35.4 (#267)
| Benchmark | Kimi K3 | Llama 3.1-70B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1476 | 1261 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | 1232 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2082 | 784 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1488 | 1256 |
| WildBench | — | 75.8% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1339 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Kimi K3 better than Llama 3.1-70B?
Kimi K3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 59.5 to 29.6 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-70B costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Kimi K3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Kimi K3 or Llama 3.1-70B?
Llama 3.1-70B is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Kimi K3 lists at $3 and $15.
Is Kimi K3 or Llama 3.1-70B better for coding?
Kimi K3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 61.0 versus 30.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Kimi K3 does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Kimi K3 and Llama 3.1-70B share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Kimi K3 has 53 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1-70B has 35.