Grok Code Fast 1 vs Llama Guard 3 1B
Grok Code Fast 1 (2025) and Llama Guard 3 1B (2024) are agentic coding models from xAI and AI at Meta. Grok Code Fast 1 ships a 262K-token context window, while Llama Guard 3 1B ships a not-yet-sourced context window. On pricing, Llama Guard 3 1B costs $0.1/1M input tokens versus $0.2/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit.
Llama Guard 3 1B is ~100% cheaper at $0.1/1M; pay for Grok Code Fast 1 only for coding workflow support.
Specs
| Released | 2025-08-27 | 2024-09-25 |
| Context window | 262K | — |
| Parameters | 314B | 1B |
| Architecture | mixture of experts | decoder only |
| License | Proprietary | Open Source |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Grok Code Fast 1 | Llama Guard 3 1B | |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.2/1M tokens | $0.1/1M tokens |
| Output price | $1.5/1M tokens | $0.1/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Grok Code Fast 1 | Llama Guard 3 1B | |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | ||
| Multimodal | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Function calling | ||
| Tool use | ||
| Structured outputs | ||
| Code execution |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.
Deep dive
The capability footprint differs most on function calling: Grok Code Fast 1, tool use: Grok Code Fast 1, and structured outputs: Grok Code Fast 1. Both models share the core language-model surface, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, Grok Code Fast 1 lists $0.2/1M input and $1.5/1M output tokens, while Llama Guard 3 1B lists $0.1/1M input and $0.1/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Llama Guard 3 1B lower by about $0.49 per million blended tokens. Availability is 1 providers versus 1, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Grok Code Fast 1 when coding workflow support are central to the workload. Choose Llama Guard 3 1B when provider fit and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions.
FAQ
Which is cheaper, Grok Code Fast 1 or Llama Guard 3 1B?
Llama Guard 3 1B is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Grok Code Fast 1 costs $0.2/1M input and $1.5/1M output tokens. Llama Guard 3 1B costs $0.1/1M input and $0.1/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Grok Code Fast 1 or Llama Guard 3 1B open source?
Grok Code Fast 1 is listed under Proprietary. Llama Guard 3 1B is listed under Open Source. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for function calling, Grok Code Fast 1 or Llama Guard 3 1B?
Grok Code Fast 1 has the clearer documented function calling signal in this comparison. If function calling is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for tool use, Grok Code Fast 1 or Llama Guard 3 1B?
Grok Code Fast 1 has the clearer documented tool use signal in this comparison. If tool use is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Which is better for structured outputs, Grok Code Fast 1 or Llama Guard 3 1B?
Grok Code Fast 1 has the clearer documented structured outputs signal in this comparison. If structured outputs is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Grok Code Fast 1 and Llama Guard 3 1B?
Grok Code Fast 1 is available on OpenRouter. Llama Guard 3 1B is available on Fireworks AI. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-04-24. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.