llama3.1-70b vs mistral-24b on Apple M2 Pro

Compare llama3.1-70b and mistral-24b running locally on Apple M2 Pro (16GB unified) — tokens/sec, VRAM fit, and quality scores for local inference.

Quick answer: This Apple M2 Pro comparison shows VRAM fit and quality data for llama3.1-70b vs mistral-24b, but one or both decode-speed benchmarks are still missing.

Compare a different combination

llama3.1-70b
tok/s (decode)
Quant Q4_K_M
VRAM required 42GB
Fits on Apple M2 Pro ✗ No
Quality score 66 / 100
Eval sources
Data estimate
mistral-24b
tok/s (decode)
Quant Q4_K_M
VRAM required 14.4GB
Fits on Apple M2 Pro ✗ No
Quality score 66 / 100
Eval sources
Data estimate
Improve this GPU comparison
Measured llama3.1-70b or mistral-24b on Apple M2 Pro?

Add a source link or correction so this page can rank with real hardware-specific data instead of estimates.

Contribute GPU comparison data

GPU comparison FAQ

Which is faster on Apple M2 Pro: llama3.1-70b or mistral-24b?

This Apple M2 Pro comparison shows VRAM fit and quality data for llama3.1-70b vs mistral-24b, but one or both decode-speed benchmarks are still missing.

Do both models fit on Apple M2 Pro?

llama3.1-70b: ✗ No. mistral-24b: ✗ No. The fit labels use Q4_K_M VRAM estimates and the benchmark data available for this GPU.

How much VRAM do these models need?

llama3.1-70b needs about 42GB in Q4_K_M; mistral-24b needs about 14.4GB in Q4_K_M.

Why can speed differ by GPU?

Local LLM speed depends on GPU memory bandwidth, backend, quantization, context length, and whether the model fits entirely in VRAM or unified memory.

How can I correct this comparison?

Use the GitHub correction link on this page with your GPU, model, quantization, context length, and measured decode tokens per second.

Last updated: 2026-06-16 Suggest a correction → GitHub