0 providers0 models

Model crosswalk

Side-by-side on price, capability and workload — three-way comparison.

Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405b
vs
Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70b
vs
Llama 3.3 70b Instruct
Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405bA

Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405b

Cheapest provider
$/1M input
$/1M output
Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70bB

Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70b

Cheapest provider
$/1M input
$/1M output
Llama 3.3 70b InstructC

Llama 3.3 70b Instruct

Cheapest provider
$/1M input
$/1M output
Specs and cheapest providers
SpecHermes 3 Llama 3.1 405bHermes 3 Llama 3.1 70bLlama 3.3 70b Instruct
Parameters
Context window
License
Released
Cheapest provider
Provider
Input / 1M tokens
Output / 1M tokens
Benchmark comparison

No benchmark data available yet.

Editor's take
Nous Research's Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405B and Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70B are fine-tunes of Meta's respective base models, both released August 2024. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is Meta's December 2024 update to the 70B tier. All three carry the Llama 3 community license and 131K context windows. The key comparison is between Nous's fine-tuning approach — emphasizing reasoning traces, persona fidelity, and reduced refusals — and Meta's own improved instruct alignment in the 3.3 generation. Hermes 3 70B is a near-zero-cost swap from Llama 3.1 70B Instruct for teams running agent frameworks. The Nous fine-tuning recipe adds XML-tagged reasoning traces, tighter tool-schema adherence, and reduced RLHF softening of system prompt personas. For structured-output pipelines, multi-turn role-adherence evals, and agentic task chains where the base Llama instruct version hedges too aggressively, Hermes 3 70B is a practical improvement. Llama 3.3 70B Instruct is Meta's own answer to improving alignment at the 70B tier. Released December 2024, it delivers better instruction-following and multi-turn coherence than the 3.1 70B baseline. Teams comparing Hermes 3 70B against Llama 3.3 70B should benchmark directly on their task distribution, because neither is universally better — Meta's 3.3 update closed some of the gap that Nous was filling. Hermes 3 405B scales the same fine-tune recipe to Meta's 405B base. This reaches frontier-tier capability for complex reasoning chains and long-context analysis tasks, but requires multi-GPU infrastructure and comes with substantially higher per-token pricing. Hosted coverage is limited to a small set of providers, primarily Lambda Labs. For agent orchestration where the 70B variants hit capability limits, this is the natural upgrade path within the Hermes family. Pick Hermes 3 70B for agent frameworks where tool-schema adherence and reasoning traces matter. Pick Llama 3.3 70B for general-purpose instruction work where Meta's updated alignment tuning is sufficient. Pick Hermes 3 405B when 70B-class capability is demonstrably insufficient and the infrastructure cost is justified.
Compare two at a time
Frequently asked questions
How does Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405b compare to Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70b and Llama 3.3 70b Instruct on price?
Use the table above to compare input and output prices per 1M tokens across the cheapest available providers for each model.
Which model is best for coding: Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405b, Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70b, or Llama 3.3 70b Instruct?
HumanEval and other code benchmarks are shown in the table. For production code tasks, also consider context window size and provider latency.
What is the context window for Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405b, Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 70b, and Llama 3.3 70b Instruct?
Context window sizes are listed in the Specs row of the comparison table above.
Full model details