Meta Llama 3.1 405B vs OpenAI o1
AI Matrix
Powered by Claude AIMeta Llama 3.1 405B narrowly beats the OpenAI o1 in the ai language models category, particularly in price, scoring 6.2/10 vs 5.8/10. If you want the better overall performer, Meta Llama 3.1 405B is the clear pick.
2 Reasons Why Meta Llama 3.1 405B Is Better
- 1.Better value score: 10.0 vs 2.5
- 2.Higher overall score: 6.2/10 vs 5.8/10
Comparaison des caractéristiques
Meta Llama 3.1 405BOpenAI o1
Détail du score
Meta Llama 3.1 405BOpenAI o1
10.0
Cost Efficiency20% weight
2.5Meta Llama 3.1 405B Gagnant
8.2
Benchmark (MMLU)30% weight
9.2OpenAI o1 Gagnant
4.4
Arena ELO20% weight
7.5OpenAI o1 Gagnant
1.2
Context Window10% weight
1.9OpenAI o1 Gagnant
0.4
Speed (tok/s)10% weight
0.7Égalité
7.3
Coding (HumanEval)10% weight
8.1OpenAI o1 Gagnant
Scores are relative within the ai language modelscategory. Percentages show each dimension's weight in the overall score. A difference of less than 0.5 points is considered a tie.
Meta Llama 3.1 405B
Gagnant✓ Pros
- ●Better value for money
✗ Cons
- ●Shorter battery life
- ●Lower camera score
- ●Lower performance score
OpenAI o1
✓ Pros
- ●Strong performance score
- ●Superior battery life
- ●Higher camera score
✗ Cons
- ●Higher price tag
💰 Token Pricing (per 1M tokens)
Lower cost = better value. Free = open-source self-hosted.
| Metric | 3.1 405B | OpenAI o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Input (Prompt) | ✓Free/1M | $15.00/1M |
| Output (Completion) | ✓Free/1M | $60.00/1M |
| Open Source | ✓ Free | Proprietary |
⚡ Context Window & Speed
Context Window (tokens)
3.1 405B128K
OpenAI o1200K
| Metric | 3.1 405B | OpenAI o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Max Output | 4,096 tok | ✓100,000 tok |
| Speed | 30 tok/s | ✓40 tok/s |
| Time to First Token | ✓1.5s | 5.0s |
| Languages | 8+ | ✓50+ |
📊 Benchmark Scores
Higher is better. Industry-standard AI evaluation benchmarks.
3.1 405B
OpenAI o1
MMLU (Knowledge)
88.6|92.3
3.1 405B
OpenAI o1
HumanEval (Coding)
89.0|92.4
3.1 405B
OpenAI o1
MATH (Mathematics)
73.8|83.3
3.1 405B
OpenAI o1
GPQA (Expert Q&A)
51.1|78.3
3.1 405B
OpenAI o1
Chatbot Arena ELO
1270.0|1352.0
3.1 405B
OpenAI o1
🔧 Capabilities
| Feature | 3.1 405B | OpenAI o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Reasoning / Chain-of-Thought | ✕ | ✓ |
| Vision (Image Input) | ✕ | ✓ |
| Audio Input | ✕ | ✕ |
| Video Input | ✕ | ✕ |
| Image/Audio Output | ✕ | ✕ |
| Function Calling / Tools | ✓ | ✓ |
| JSON Mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Real-time Web Access | ✕ | ✕ |
| Fine-tuning Support | ✓ | ✕ |
| Batch API | ✓ | ✓ |
| Streaming | ✓ | ✓ |
| Open Source | ✓ | ✕ |
ℹ️ Model Details
| Field | 3.1 405B | OpenAI o1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | OpenAI |
| Parameters | 405B | — |
| Knowledge Cutoff | 2023-12 | 2023-10 |
| License | Llama 3.1 Community | Commercial |
| Best For | open sourceself hostingfine tuningenterprise privacy | reasoningmathsciencecomplex coding |
Qui devrait acheter
Buy Meta Llama 3.1 405B if…
Buy the Meta Llama 3.1 405B if you want the best overall value in this comparison. It scores higher overall and is the recommended choice for most buyers.
Buy OpenAI o1 if…
The OpenAI o1 is worth considering if you prefer its specific design, ecosystem, or brand — though it scores lower overall in our comparison.
Community Vote
Who do you think wins this matchup?
Meta Llama 3.1 405B vs OpenAI o1 — FAQ
Meta Llama 3.1 405B vs OpenAI o1: which is better?
Meta Llama 3.1 405B narrowly beats the OpenAI o1 in the ai language models category, particularly in price, scoring 6.2/10 vs 5.8/10. If you want the better overall performer, Meta Llama 3.1 405B is the clear pick.
Is Meta Llama 3.1 405B better than OpenAI o1?
Yes, Meta Llama 3.1 405B scores higher overall (8.7 vs 9.3).
Which is cheaper, Meta Llama 3.1 405B or OpenAI o1?
Check the latest prices using the buy links above.
Who should buy the Meta Llama 3.1 405B?
Buy the Meta Llama 3.1 405B if you want the best overall value in this comparison. It scores higher overall and is the recommended choice for most buyers.
Who should buy the OpenAI o1?
The OpenAI o1 is worth considering if you prefer its specific design, ecosystem, or brand — though it scores lower overall in our comparison.
