Helix 02 vs Llama 3.1 405B Instruct
At a Glance
| Compare | Helix 02Figure | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | Not reported | 131K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 29, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Helix 02 | Llama-3.1-405B-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Figure | Meta |
| Family | Helix | Llama 3 1 405b Instruct |
| Model | Helix 02 | Llama-3.1-405B-Instruct |
| Version | 02 | Llama-3.1-405B-Instruct |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-01-05 | 2024-07-23 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Robot state | Text |
| Output modalities | Robot action | Text |
| Context window | Unknown | 131K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 405.9B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | llama3.1 |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | No | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | dexterous-manipulation, long-horizon-control, tactile-control, whole-body-control | chat, generation, tools |
| Robotics model type | Vision-language-action model | Unknown |
| Action representation | Full-body joint targets | Unknown |
| Control architecture | Semantic reasoning, visuomotor policy, and kHz whole-body controller | Unknown |
| Inference location | On device | Unknown |
| Native control rate (Hz) | Unknown | Unknown |
| Supported embodiments | Figure 03 | Unknown |
| Training data | Figure reports more than 1,000 hours of human motion data plus sim-to-real reinforcement learning for its whole-body controller. | Unknown |
Helix 02 Capabilities
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct Capabilities
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Helix 02 vs Llama 3.1 405B Instruct FAQs
Is Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Helix 02 and Llama 3.1 405B Instruct, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct?+
Neither model has a directly sourced input price in this comparison. Neither model has a directly sourced output price in this comparison.
Which has a larger context window, Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Helix 02 is — and Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is 131K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct be self-hosted?+
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Helix 02 is not marked open weight; Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is open weight.
Can Helix 02 and Llama 3.1 405B Instruct understand images?+
Helix 02 is documented with image input; Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Helix 02 is — and Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is —.
Do Helix 02 and Llama 3.1 405B Instruct support reasoning and tool use?+
Helix 02: image input. Llama 3.1 405B Instruct: tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct?+
Helix 02 has 0 sourced provider routes; Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has 1, so Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Helix 02 or Llama 3.1 405B Instruct?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.