Model Comparison

Codestral-22B vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Codestral-22B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Codestral-22B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (HumanEval), while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.

Codestral-22B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Apr 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Cost data unavailable.

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Apr 01 2026 • llm-stats.com
Mistral AI
Codestral-22B
Input tokens$0.00
Output tokens$0.00
Best providerUnknown Organization
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Input tokens$0.20
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerLambda
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

47.8B diff

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct has 47.8B more parameters than Codestral-22B, making it 215.3% larger.

Mistral AI
Codestral-22B
22.2Bparameters
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
70.0Bparameters
22.2B
Codestral-22B
70.0B
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.1 70B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Mistral AI
Codestral-22B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Apr 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

Codestral-22B is licensed under MNPL-0.1, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Codestral-22B

MNPL-0.1

Open weights

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Codestral-22B was released on 2024-05-29, while Llama 3.1 70B Instruct was released on 2024-07-23.

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is 2 months newer than Codestral-22B.

Codestral-22B

May 29, 2024

1.8 years ago

Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Jul 23, 2024

1.7 years ago

1mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Mistral AI
Higher HumanEval score (81.1% vs 80.5%)
Meta
Larger context window (128,000 tokens)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Mistral AI
Codestral-22B
Meta
Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

FAQ

Common questions about Codestral-22B vs Llama 3.1 70B Instruct

Codestral-22B significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Codestral-22B is made by Mistral AI and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.
Codestral-22B scores HumanEvalFIM-Average: 91.6%, HumanEval: 81.1%, MBPP: 78.2%, Spider: 63.5%, HumanEval-Average: 61.5%. Llama 3.1 70B Instruct scores GSM-8K (CoT): 95.1%, ARC-C: 94.8%, API-Bank: 90.0%, IFEval: 87.5%, Multilingual MGSM (CoT): 86.9%.
Codestral-22B supports an unknown number of tokens and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct supports 128K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.
Key differences include licensing (MNPL-0.1 vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.
Codestral-22B is developed by Mistral AI and Llama 3.1 70B Instruct is developed by Meta.