Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct)
Nothing here. The model returned empty. We stared at it for a while.
Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) vs Llama 4 Scout
Compare Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) and Llama 4 Scout, both from Meta AI, context windows of 128K vs 10.0M, tested across 26 shared challenges. Updated April 2026.
Which is better, Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) or Llama 4 Scout?
Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) and Llama 4 Scout are both competitive models. Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) costs $0.59/M input tokens vs $0.25/M for Llama 4 Scout. Context windows: 128K vs 10000K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) and Llama 4 Scout
Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) is made by meta while Llama 4 Scout is from meta. Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) has a 128K token context window compared to Llama 4 Scout's 10000K. On pricing, Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct) costs $0.59/M input tokens vs $0.25/M for Llama 4 Scout.
Our Verdict
Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct)
Llama 4 Scout
No community votes yet. On paper, these are closely matched - try both with your actual task to see which fits your workflow.
Too close to call
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
81%
Llama 4 Scout uses 30.0x more headings
Llama 3.1 70B (Instruct)
Llama 4 Scout
51%Vocabulary43%
18wSentence Length42w
0.46Hedging0.81
3.4Bold4.1
5.6Lists7.3
0.00Emoji0.00
0.00Headings0.30
0.06Transitions0.04
Based on 15 + 10 text responses
vsAsk them anything yourself
279 AI models invented the same fake scientist.
We read every word. 250 models. 2.14 million words. This is what we found.
Free preview13 of 58 slides
FAQ