Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B | Hy3 |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.56 | $0.14 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $0.56 | $0.55 |
Verdict. Hy3 takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Hy3 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Hy3 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B is strongest on Intelligence Index (6.5). Hy3 leads on Coding Index (58.8), Intelligence Index (42.2).
Speed. Throughput is comparable — 55 tok/s vs 67 tok/s — so generation speed shouldn't drive your choice here. Look at the per-benchmark wins instead.
Provider. Meta and Tencent sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Meta tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Tencent often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B costs $25.20 ($302/year); Hy3 costs $12.45 ($149/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B ≈ $3.92/run, Hy3 ≈ $1.80/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B ≈ $168/run, Hy3 ≈ $83/run. Hy3 becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Hy3 is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.24/M tokens vs $0.56/M for Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B.
Hy3 wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Hy3 generates tokens faster at 67 tok/s vs 55 tok/s. Llama 3.1 Instruct 70B also has lower time-to-first-token (1.27s vs 2.88s).
Choose based on your priorities: Hy3 for lower cost, Hy3 for stronger benchmark performance, and Hy3 for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.