Llama 3.1 70B vs Hy3

At a Glance

Compare
Hy3Tencent
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$0.0825Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$0.33Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131K262K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldLlama-3.1-70BHy3
DeveloperMetaTencent
FamilyLlama 3 1 70bHy3
ModelLlama-3.1-70BHy3
VersionLlama-3.1-70BHy3
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2024-07-23Unknown
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K262K
Total parameters70.6B298.8B
Active parametersUnknown21B
Licensellama3.1apache-2.0
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessHugging Face (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitiesgenerationchat, generation, tools

Llama 3.1 70B Capabilities

generation
Serving providers1
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-3.1-70B

Hy3 Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDtencent/Hy3

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama 3.1 70B vs Hy3 FAQs

Is Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 3.1 70B and Hy3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3?+

Only Hy3 has a directly sourced input price: $0.0825 per million tokens. Only Hy3 has a directly sourced output price: $0.33 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3?+

Hy3 has the larger sourced context window. Llama 3.1 70B supports 131K and Hy3 supports 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Llama 3.1 70B is open weight; Hy3 is open weight.

Can Llama 3.1 70B and Hy3 understand images?+

Llama 3.1 70B is not documented with image input; Hy3 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 3.1 70B is — and Hy3 is —.

Do Llama 3.1 70B and Hy3 support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama 3.1 70B: none of these features are definitively sourced. Hy3: tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3?+

Llama 3.1 70B has 1 sourced provider route; Hy3 has 3, so Hy3 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama 3.1 70B or Hy3?+

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.

Send Feedback