Llama 3 vs. Mistral Large: A Benchmark for Running Open-Source LLMs Locally for Data Privacy

The era of generative AI has presented a fundamental dilemma for businesses and individuals alike: how to leverage the transformative power of Large Language Models (LLMs) without compromising data privacy. Sending sensitive internal documents, customer data, or proprietary code to a third-party API is a non-starter for many. The solution, once a niche pursuit, is now a strategic imperative: running state-of-the-art LLMs locally.

As of August 2025, the open-source arena is dominated by two titans: Meta’s Llama 3 and Mistral AI’s Mistral Large. Both offer performance that rivals or exceeds many closed-source counterparts, but they present different philosophies, architectures, and requirements. This article provides a benchmark comparison of these two models specifically through the lens of local deployment, focusing on hardware needs, performance trade-offs, and the ultimate goal of achieving digital sovereignty.

The Privacy Imperative: Why Local First?

Before diving into the models, it’s crucial to understand why local deployment has become so critical. When you use a cloud-based LLM service, your data travels. It crosses the public internet, resides on a provider’s servers, and is often subject to their terms of service, which may include using your data for future model training. This creates several risks:

• Data Breaches: Any data stored on third-party servers is a potential target for cyberattacks.
• Compliance Violations: Industries governed by regulations like GDPR (in Europe) or HIPAA (for healthcare in the US) face steep penalties for mishandling sensitive data.
• Loss of Intellectual Property: Sending proprietary code, strategic plans, or R&D data to an external API is an unacceptable risk for many organizations.
• Vendor Lock-in and Cost: Relying on APIs makes you dependent on a single provider’s pricing, availability, and censorship policies.

Running an LLM on your own hardware—whether a powerful local workstation or a private cloud server—eliminates these risks entirely. Your data never leaves your control. This is the foundation of true data privacy in the age of AI.

Introducing the Contenders

Meta’s Llama 3: Building on the monumental success of its predecessor, Llama 3 represents Meta’s continued commitment to the open-weight AI movement. It was trained on a vastly larger and more carefully curated dataset, significantly improving its reasoning, instruction-following, and reducing its propensity for false refusals. Llama 3 comes in several sizes, most notably the highly accessible 8-billion parameter (Llama-3-8B) model and the powerful 70-billion parameter (Llama-3-70B) version. Its strength lies in its massive community, extensive documentation, and its performance as a general-purpose “do anything” model.

Mistral AI’s Mistral Large: Hailing from the European AI champion, Mistral AI, Mistral Large is a flagship model designed for top-tier reasoning capabilities. While its most powerful version is often accessed via their API, powerful open-weight versions have cemented its place in the local deployment landscape. Mistral Large is particularly renowned for its exceptional performance in coding, mathematics, and multilingual tasks. Its architecture, often leveraging techniques like Mixture of Experts (MoE), is designed for high efficiency, aiming to deliver maximum performance for a given computational budget.

Head-to-Head: The Local Deployment Benchmark

When choosing a model for local use, standard academic benchmarks are only part of the story. The practical realities of hardware constraints, inference speed, and ecosystem support are paramount.

1. Hardware Requirements: The VRAM Barrier

The single most significant bottleneck for running LLMs locally is Video RAM (VRAM). The model’s parameters must be loaded into the GPU’s memory for fast processing.

Model Variant	Raw Model Size (FP16)	Minimum VRAM (Quantized, 4-bit)	Recommended Hardware for Good Performance
Llama-3-8B	~16 GB	~6 GB	Consumer GPU (NVIDIA RTX 3060 12GB)
Mistral-7B (Base)	~14 GB	~5 GB	Consumer GPU (NVIDIA RTX 3060 12GB)
Llama-3-70B	~140 GB	~40 GB	Prosumer/Datacenter (NVIDIA RTX 4090 24GB x2, A100 80GB)
Mistral Large	Varies (MoE)	~45 GB	Prosumer/Datacenter (NVIDIA RTX 4090 24GB x2, H100 80GB)

Export to Sheets

• Analysis: For hobbyists or small-scale applications, Llama-3-8B is the clear winner in accessibility. It runs comfortably on high-end consumer hardware. In contrast, both Llama-3-70B and Mistral Large are in a different league. They necessitate professional-grade hardware, often requiring multiple GPUs or expensive datacenter cards like the NVIDIA A100 or H100. For businesses serious about local AI, this is a planned capital expenditure.

2. Performance, Speed, and Quantization

To make large models fit on smaller hardware, we use quantization. This technique reduces the precision of the model’s weights (e.g., from 16-bit floating point, FP16, to 4-bit integers, INT4), drastically cutting VRAM usage. The key question is how much performance is lost in the process.

• Llama 3: The Llama-3-70B model has proven to be remarkably resilient to quantization. Community tests show that 4-bit quantized versions retain over 95% of the reasoning capability of the original FP16 model, making it a highly practical choice for deployment. Its dense architecture seems to handle the precision loss gracefully.
• Mistral Large: Due to its sophisticated Mixture of Experts (MoE) architecture, quantization can be slightly more complex. However, tools like llama.cpp and bitsandbytes have matured significantly, offering robust quantization for MoE models. While there might be a marginally higher performance drop compared to Llama 3 in some specific tasks, Mistral Large’s raw architectural efficiency often compensates, delivering very fast inference speeds (tokens per second) once loaded.

Inference Speed: For a given hardware setup (e.g., two RTX 4090s), Mistral Large’s MoE architecture often yields a higher token-per-second output. This is because during any given inference pass, only a fraction of the total parameters (the “experts”) are activated. This makes it feel “snappier” in interactive applications.

3. Qualitative Capabilities: The Right Tool for the Job

• Llama 3 (70B): The Generalist Powerhouse. Llama 3 excels at nuanced understanding, creative writing, and complex instruction-following. If your task involves summarizing diverse documents, acting as a sophisticated chatbot, or generating marketing copy, Llama 3’s broad training data gives it an edge. It feels more aligned with general human conversation and creativity.
• Mistral Large: The Specialist’s Blade. Mistral Large shines where precision is key. Its reasoning capabilities in STEM fields, its multilingual fluency, and its code generation are widely considered best-in-class within the open-source world. If your primary use case is acting as a programming assistant, a data analysis tool, or a translation engine, Mistral Large often provides more accurate and concise results.

4. Ecosystem and Tooling

A model is nothing without the tools to run it. Here, the landscape is fortunately robust for both.

• Community: Llama 3, backed by Meta, has an enormous and vibrant user and developer community. Finding tutorials, fine-tuned model variants on Hugging Face, and troubleshooting support is incredibly easy.
• Tooling: Both models are first-class citizens in essential local LLM tools.
  • Ollama: Provides the easiest, one-click way to get both models running locally.
  • llama.cpp: The gold standard for efficient CPU and GPU inference, with extensive support and quantization options for both model families.
  • vLLM & TGI: For production-grade serving, these frameworks offer optimized, high-throughput inference for both Llama and Mistral architectures.

The ecosystem is a draw, with a slight edge to Llama 3 in terms of sheer community volume and the number of experimental fine-tunes available.

Conclusion: Which Should You Choose?

The choice between Llama 3 and Mistral Large for local deployment is not about a definitive “winner,” but about aligning the right tool with your specific needs and constraints.

Choose Llama 3 if:

• Your primary need is a highly capable, general-purpose model for a wide range of tasks.
• You are a hobbyist or have limited hardware and are targeting the 8B model.
• You value the largest possible community for support and fine-tuned variants.
• Your applications involve creative writing or complex, conversational instructions.

Choose Mistral Large if:

• Your use case is specialized in coding, science, or multilingual applications.
• You prioritize raw inference speed (tokens/second) in a production environment.
• You have the requisite high-end hardware and your goal is to match or exceed the performance of top proprietary models in specific domains.
• You are building enterprise-grade tools that demand precision and factual accuracy.

Ultimately, the rise of both Llama 3 and Mistral Large as viable local alternatives is the real victory. It signals a major shift in the AI landscape, empowering developers and organizations to build powerful, private-by-design applications. The investment in hardware and technical setup is significant, but the return—complete control over your data and your AI destiny—is priceless.