LLM Reference

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 vs Llama 3 70B Instruct

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 (2025) and Llama 3 70B Instruct (2024) are compact production models from NVIDIA AI and AI at Meta. Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 ships a 128k-token context window, while Llama 3 70B Instruct ships a 8k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 fits 16x more tokens; pick it for long-context work and Llama 3 70B Instruct for tighter calls.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalLlama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1Llama 3 70B Instruct
Best forgeneral production evaluationprovider-routed production
Decision fitLong contextCoding, Classification, and JSON / Tool use
Context window128k8k
Cheapest output-$0.40/1M tokens
Provider routes1 tracked18 tracked
Shared benchmarks0 rows0 rows

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 when...
  • Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Local decision data tags Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 for Long context.
Choose Llama 3 70B Instruct when...
  • Llama 3 70B Instruct has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
  • Llama 3 70B Instruct uniquely exposes Structured outputs in local model data.
  • Local decision data tags Llama 3 70B Instruct for Coding, Classification, and JSON / Tool use.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1

Unavailable

No complete token price in local provider data

Llama 3 70B Instruct

$420

Cheapest tracked route/tier: Hyperbolic AI Inference

Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.

Switch friction

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 -> Llama 3 70B Instruct
  • Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Llama 3 70B Instruct adds Structured outputs in local capability data.
Llama 3 70B Instruct -> Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1
  • Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Check replacement coverage for Structured outputs before moving production traffic.

Specs

Specification
Released2025-06-012024-04-18
Context window128k8k
Parameters49B70B
Architecturedecoder onlydecoder only
License1Open Source
Knowledge cutoff-2023-12

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeLlama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1Llama 3 70B Instruct
Input price-$0.40/1M tokens
Output price-$0.40/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

CapabilityLlama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1Llama 3 70B Instruct
VisionNoNo
MultimodalNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingNoNo
Tool useNoNo
Structured outputsNoYes
Code executionNoNo
IDE integrationNoNo
Computer useNoNo
Parallel agentsNoNo

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint differs most on structured outputs: Llama 3 70B Instruct. 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.

Pricing coverage is uneven: Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 has no token price sourced yet and Llama 3 70B Instruct has $0.40/1M input tokens. Provider availability is 1 tracked routes versus 18. Treat unknown pricing as an integration gap, then verify the route you will actually call before estimating production spend.

Choose Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 when long-context analysis and larger context windows are central to the workload. Choose Llama 3 70B Instruct when provider fit and broader provider choice 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. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency.

FAQ

Which has a larger context window, Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 or Llama 3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 supports 128k tokens, while Llama 3 70B Instruct supports 8k tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible.

Is Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 or Llama 3 70B Instruct open source?

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 is listed under 1. Llama 3 70B Instruct 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 structured outputs, Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 or Llama 3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3 70B Instruct 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 Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 and Llama 3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 is available on NVIDIA NIM. Llama 3 70B Instruct is available on GCP Vertex AI, AWS Bedrock, Microsoft Foundry, NVIDIA NIM, and DeepInfra. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

When should I pick Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 over Llama 3 70B Instruct?

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1 fits 16x more tokens; pick it for long-context work and Llama 3 70B Instruct for tighter calls. If your workload also depends on long-context analysis, start with Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B v1; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Llama 3 70B Instruct.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-05-22. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.