WritingmateWritingmate
Model Comparison

Llama 3 8B Lunaris vs Ox AlphaWhich Is Better in 2026?

Sao10K•
Stealth

Llama 3 8B Lunaris vs Ox Alpha: which should you choose in 2026?

Llama 3 8B Lunaris (by Sao10K) and Ox Alpha (by Stealth) are compared below. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price, and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader.

Ox Alpha has no token charge in the catalog; the other model costs $0.0425 per 1M tokens on a blended 3:1 input/output basis.

Ox Alpha has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 8,192 tokens).

Choose Llama 3 8B Lunaris if…

  • • your own prompt tests favor its output; shared comparable evidence does not identify a unique advantage

Choose Ox Alpha if…

  • • lower blended API cost matters for your workload
  • • you work with longer documents, transcripts, or codebases
  • • you need a model with explicit reasoning support
  • • you need image inputs

The benchmark count includes only results measured with a matching benchmark version and protocol. Arena scores are shown separately. Missing, preliminary, and incompatible data is not treated as a controlled win. Published point-score comparisons are labeled separately when protocol details are incomplete. For text-output models, the verdict also compares token pricing and context windows.

Chat with both models
vs

Performance benchmarks

Every value links to its source. A dash means that no reviewed result is available for that exact model and protocol.

Llama 3 8B Lunaris and Ox Alpha benchmark results
BenchmarkLlama 3 8B LunarisOx Alpha
AutomationBench-AA

A 657-task benchmark of multi-step work across simulated SaaS applications in six business domains. The Artificial Analysis protocol reports a guardrail-aware score and is distinct from both the public Zapier split and the unrelated dynamic AutoBench framework.

Guardrail-aware score

——
BrowseComp

A benchmark of difficult, verifiable information-seeking questions designed to measure an agent's ability to locate hard-to-find facts through web browsing.

Accuracy

——
OSWorld-Verified

A verified computer-use benchmark in which multimodal agents operate desktop applications and are graded from the resulting environment state.

Mean task reward

——
SWE-Bench Verified

A human-validated subset of real GitHub issues used to measure whether a coding agent can produce repository patches that resolve the associated tests.

Resolved

——
Terminal-Bench 2.1

Version 2.1 of the benchmark for completing realistic tasks in terminal environments. Harness, resource limits, and attempt count are part of the protocol.

Mean task success

——
AutoBench

A dynamic LLM evaluation framework in which models generate questions, answer them, and participate in reciprocal peer assessment. AutoBench is distinct from Zapier's AutomationBench.

Weighted peer-assessment score

——
GPQA Diamond

The highest-quality subset of Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A, designed to test expert-level scientific reasoning in biology, physics, and chemistry.

Accuracy

——
Humanity's Last Exam

A 2,500-question expert-level benchmark spanning dozens of academic fields. Tool-assisted and no-tools results are separate protocols and must not be merged.

Accuracy

——

Benchmark sources

    Reviewed evidence last updated 2026-08-09.

    Pricing, capabilities, and model facts

    Llama 3 8B Lunaris and Ox Alpha model facts
    FeatureLlama 3 8B LunarisOx Alpha
    Context & model facts
    DeveloperSao10KStealth
    API providerSao10KOx Alpha
    Input context8,192 tokens1,048,576 tokens
    Maximum output—131,072 tokens
    Released——
    Added to WritingmateAug 13, 2024Aug 20, 2026
    LicenseNot availableNot available
    Knowledge cutoff2023-12-31—
    Capabilities
    InputsTextText, Image, Video
    OutputsTextText
    Provider endpoint accepts tool parametersNoYes
    ReasoningNoYes
    VisionNoYes
    Image GenerationNoNo
    Video GenerationNoNo
    API pricing
    Input (per 1M tokens)$0.04$0.00
    Output (per 1M tokens)$0.05$0.00
    Blended 3:1 input/output$0.0425$0.00
    API performance
    p95 latencyNot measuredNot measured
    Output throughputNot measuredNot measured
    Writingmate shows API performance only when both models have enough observations from the same measurement window, prompt profile, and provider. Third-party latency values are not copied into this table.

    Data sources

    • Writingmate model catalog (pricing, limits, and availability)

    Catalog data last updated Aug 20, 2026.

    Why Pay for Multiple Subscriptions?

    Comparing Llama 3 8B Lunaris from Sao10K with Ox Alpha from Stealth? Instead of managing separate API keys and subscriptions, get both with Writingmate.

    Subscription-plan access for Llama 3 8B Lunaris and Ox Alpha
    PlanPriceLlama 3 8B LunarisOx AlphaAI ImagesAI Video
    Writingmate Pro
    Most popular
    		$20/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreSora 2, VEO 3.1
    Writingmate Ultimate
    Power users
    		$60/moIncludedIncludedNano Banana Pro, FLUX.2, DALL-E & moreSora 2, VEO 3.1
    View Plans & Pricing

    Llama 3 8B Lunaris vs Ox Alpha FAQ

    Which is better, Llama 3 8B Lunaris or Ox Alpha?

    There are not enough shared, protocol-compatible benchmark results to declare a performance leader. Ox Alpha has no token charge in the catalog; the other model costs $0.0425 per 1M tokens on a blended 3:1 input/output basis. Ox Alpha has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 8,192 tokens).

    Which model is cheaper to use through an API?

    Ox Alpha has no token charge in the catalog; the other model costs $0.0425 per 1M tokens on a blended 3:1 input/output basis.

    Which model supports more context?

    Ox Alpha has the larger context window (1,048,576 tokens vs 8,192 tokens).

    Can I switch between Llama 3 8B Lunaris and Ox Alpha?

    Yes. Use the model selector on this page to open any current Writingmate model comparison. You can also run the same prompt with both models in Writingmate.