Model Comparison

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)
vs. Llama 65B

Comparing 2 AI models · 5 benchmarks · Meta

Chat with Llama

Most Affordable

Meta logo Llama 65B

$0.00/1M

Highest Intelligence

Meta logo Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)

43.2% GPQA

Price Difference

Infinityx

input cost range

Composite Indices

Intelligence, Coding, Math

Standard Benchmarks

Academic and industry benchmarks

Benchmark Winners

5 tests
Meta logo

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)

5
  • GPQA
  • MMLU Pro
  • HLE
  • LiveCodeBench
  • MATH 500
Meta logo

Llama 65B

0

No clear wins

Metric
Meta logo Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)
Meta
Meta logo Llama 65B
Meta
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input Cost $0.72/1M$0.00/1M
Output Cost $0.72/1M$0.00/1M
Blended (3:1) $0.72/1M
Specifications
Organization MetaMeta
Release Date Sep 25, 2024Feb 24, 2023
Performance & Speed
Throughput 37.6 tok/s
TTFT 395ms
Latency 395ms
Composite Indices
Intelligence 11.97.4
Coding
Math
Standard Benchmarks
GPQA 43.2%
MMLU Pro 67.1%
HLE 4.9%
LiveCodeBench 21.4%
MATH 500 62.9%
AIME 2025
AIME (Original) 5.0%
SciCode 24.0%
LCR
IFBench
TAU-bench v2
TerminalBench Hard

Key Takeaways

Llama 65B offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision) leads in reasoning capabilities with a 43.2% GPQA, excelling at complex analytical tasks and problem-solving.

All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.

When to Choose Each Model

Meta logo

Llama 3.2 Instruct 90B (Vision)

  • Complex reasoning tasks
  • Research & analysis
Meta logo

Llama 65B

  • Cost-sensitive applications
  • High-volume processing
EU Made in Europe

Chat with 100+ AI Models in one App.

Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, GLM-5, Kimi K2.5 and many more.

AI Model Comparison Guide

Compare large language models (LLMs) side-by-side with detailed benchmark scores, pricing, and performance metrics. Our interactive comparison tool helps you evaluate AI models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta, DeepSeek, and other leading providers. Use our AI model leaderboard to discover more models to compare.

Understanding Composite Indices

  • Intelligence Index: Aggregated score combining MMLU-Pro, GPQA, and HLE benchmarks - measures overall reasoning and knowledge capabilities
  • Coding Index: Composite metric from LiveCodeBench, SciCode, and LiveCodeBench Review - evaluates programming proficiency across multiple languages
  • Math Index: Combined score from AIME, AIME 2025, and MATH-500 benchmarks - assesses mathematical reasoning from high school to competition level

Key Comparison Metrics

  • Benchmark Scores: Standardized tests measuring intelligence, coding, math, and specialized capabilities - higher percentages indicate better performance
  • Pricing Analysis: Compare input and output token costs across models - critical for budgeting API usage and scaling applications
  • Performance Metrics: Throughput (tokens/second) and latency measurements for real-time application planning
  • Context Windows: Maximum token capacity for processing documents and maintaining conversation history

How to Compare AI Models Effectively

Performance vs Cost

Balance benchmark scores against token pricing - flagship models offer 10-15% better performance but cost 5-10x more than smaller alternatives

Task-Specific Selection

Prioritize relevant indices: coding index for development tasks, math index for STEM applications, intelligence index for general reasoning

Real-World Testing

Use our free AI chat interface to test models with your specific prompts before committing to API integration

All benchmark scores, pricing data, and performance metrics are sourced from Artificial Analysis and updated daily. Compare models by intelligence, coding ability, math performance, speed, cost, or release date using our comprehensive AI model leaderboard.