0 providers50 models

Model crosswalk

Side-by-side on price, capability and workload. Both columns use the cheapest provider for that model.

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
vs
OLMo 2 7B Instruct
Llama 3.1 8B InstructA

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

8B params · 131K context · llama-3

Cheapest providergroq
$/1M input$50000.00
$/1M output$80000.00
OLMo 2 7B InstructB

OLMo 2 7B Instruct

7B params · 4K context · apache-2.0

Cheapest provider
$/1M input
$/1M output
Specs and cheapest providers
SpecLlama 3.1 8B InstructOLMo 2 7B Instruct
Parameters8B7B
Context window131K tokens🏆4K tokens
Licensellama-3apache-2.0
Released2024-07-232024-11-21
Cheapest provider
Providergroq
Input / 1M tokens$50000.00
Output / 1M tokens$80000.00

Add a third model to compare

Benchmark comparison

No benchmark data available for either model yet.

Sample workload — 5M in + 2M out per month

using each model's cheapest provider
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
$410000.00 /mo
OLMo 2 7B Instruct
$0.00 /mo

What changes at scale

Output tokens dominate cost above a 1:3 input/output ratio. Below 1:1, input dominates and cheaper-input providers win regardless of headline price.

1M in · 250K out$70000.00 · $0.00
5M in · 2M out$410000.00 · $0.00
20M in · 10M out$1800000.00 · $0.00
100M in · 60M out$9800000.00 · $0.00

Capability vs price

scatter
// scatter: benchmark × $/1M out
Calculate cost for your workload

Compare total monthly cost across providers for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and OLMo 2 7B Instruct using your own input/output token mix.

Open workload calculator →
Editor's take
[Llama 3.1 8B Instruct](/models/meta--llama-3.1-8b-instruct) is Meta's general-purpose small model with strong benchmark performance and wide provider support. [OLMo 2 7B Instruct](/models/allenai--olmo-2-7b-instruct) is Allen Institute for AI's fully open model — weights, training data, code, and evaluation harness are all public. That transparency distinction matters for some engineering teams, but the performance and cost story favors Llama 3.1 8B in most production scenarios. On quality benchmarks, Llama 3.1 8B outperforms OLMo 2 7B on MMLU, ARC, and instruction-following evals by 4–8 points on average. Both models are priced in the $0.05–$0.20/M input token range, though OLMo 2 7B has fewer hosted providers and may show higher variance in availability. Context window support also differs: Llama 3.1 8B supports 128K tokens; OLMo 2 7B tops out at 4K in most deployments. **Where Llama 3.1 8B wins:** Production inference APIs needing quality, long-context support, and provider choice. For most teams, the benchmark gap and the 128K context window make Llama 3.1 8B the straightforward choice when cost is similar. **Where OLMo 2 7B wins:** Research, compliance-driven, or auditability-sensitive deployments where full training transparency is required. If your team needs to inspect training data for bias audits, reproduce training runs, or publish open-science reproducibility findings, OLMo 2's fully disclosed data pipeline is uniquely valuable. **Bottom line:** Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for production workloads where quality, context length, and provider breadth matter. Pick OLMo 2 7B Instruct when data transparency and open-science auditability are hard requirements.
Related comparisons
Full model details