AI model comparison

GPT-5 mini vs Llama 3.1 70B

Comparing a managed small model with a hosted open-weight model for teams weighing vendor-managed simplicity against self-hostable flexibility.

Pricing & context

All figures below are list prices pulled directly from the Harpd pricing registry (last verified 2026-08-18). Prices change often — open each model’s source link to confirm before budgeting.

MetricGPT-5 miniLlama 3.1 70B
ProviderOpenAIMeta · Together
Input / 1M tokens$0.25$0.88
Output / 1M tokens$2$0.88
Cached input / 1M tokens$0.03Not published
Batch discount50% offNot published
Context window400,000 tokens128,000 tokens
SourceOpenAI pricing ↗Meta · Together pricing ↗
GPT-5 mini

Capabilities

GPT-5 mini is a managed, low-latency small model with a 400k context window, prompt caching, and a very low per-token price.

Llama 3.1 70B

Capabilities

Llama 3.1 70B is an open-weight model available via resale hosting with a 128k context window, offering flexibility for self-hosting or custom deployment.

Recommendation

The decision is less about raw quality and more about control versus convenience: GPT-5 mini is turnkey and cheap, while Llama 3.1 70B appeals when you want open-weight portability or on-prem options. Either can work for many tasks, but only testing on your real workload reveals which meets your bar. Compare both on ModelSwitch before committing.

Updated 2026-08-18.

Answer

Price tells you what a model costs. It does not tell you whether it can replace your current model on your real tasks.

Run your real tasks
Evidence
  • Benchmarks measured on Harpd are planned — see /benchmarks/.

Explore related tools

Model Compare

Side-by-side pricing and capability explorer for every model in the registry.

LLM Pricing

Full list-price table across providers, updated from official sources.

Cost per Successful Task

Why raw token price hides the real cost of failed or retried calls.

ModelSwitch

Find the cheapest model that passes your real tasks, measured on your workload.

Frequently asked questions

How do I know if a cheaper model is safe to use?
Price only tells you cost, not whether a model preserves your quality bar on real work. The safe path is to run a representative sample of your actual tasks through both models and compare outputs against your acceptance criteria. Harpd’s ModelSwitch does exactly this — it switches only once a cheaper model passes your tasks, not on price alone.
Is price a good proxy for quality?
No. List price reflects positioning and context length, not how a model performs on your specific workload. A cheaper model can be better for narrow tasks and worse for others. Treat price as one input to a cost-vs-capability decision, and validate capability with real-task testing rather than assuming a ranking.
What is cost per successful task?
Cost per successful task divides your total spend by the tasks that actually succeeded, folding in retries and failures that still cost tokens. A model with a lower per-token price can end up more expensive per successful task if it fails or retries more often. See /cost-per-successful-task/ for the full method.
How does ModelSwitch test a replacement model?
ModelSwitch runs your real tasks against a candidate model and compares results to your current one using your defined acceptance checks. It switches only when the cheaper model passes, and reports the measured savings. It does not rely on published benchmarks or price as a proxy for quality.