Matriz de Seleccion de Modelos de AI
Compara modelos LLM por costo, latencia, context window, accuracy y use case. Incluye criterios de decision, resultados de benchmarks, comparacion de pricing y recomendaciones para classification, extraction, summarization, code y agent tasks.
Nota para desarrolladores hispanohablantes: Esta guía incluye ejemplos y convenciones de nomenclatura adaptadas a equipos que trabajan en español. Cuando existen diferencias significativas en terminología técnica entre el inglés y el español, se indican explícitamente para facilitar la comunicación en equipos multiculturales.
Overview
Esta matriz compara LLM models across cost, latency, context window, accuracy, y task suitability. Usala para selectar el right model para tu use case y budget. Updatea pricing y benchmarks a medida que new models se releasean.
1. Model Comparison Table
Model | Input $/1K | Output $/1K | Context | Latency p50 | Multimodal
───────────────────┼────────────┼─────────────┼─────────┼─────────────┼───────────
GPT-4o | $0.00250 | $0.01000 | 128K | 800ms | Yes
GPT-4o-mini | $0.00015 | $0.00060 | 128K | 300ms | Yes
Claude 3.5 Sonnet | $0.00300 | $0.01500 | 200K | 1000ms | Yes
Claude 3 Haiku | $0.00025 | $0.00125 | 200K | 400ms | Yes
Llama 3.1 70B | $0.00059 | $0.00079 | 128K | 600ms | No
Llama 3.1 8B | $0.00005 | $0.00008 | 128K | 200ms | No
Gemini 1.5 Pro | $0.00125 | $0.00500 | 2M | 1200ms | Yes
Gemini 1.5 Flash | $0.000075 | $0.00030 | 1M | 400ms | Yes
Mistral Large | $0.00200 | $0.00600 | 128K | 700ms | No
Mistral Small | $0.00020 | $0.00060 | 128K | 300ms | No
2. Cost per 1000 Queries
Assumptions: 1500 input tokens, 500 output tokens per query
Model | Cost per query | Cost per 1K queries | Monthly (10K q/day)
───────────────────┼────────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────────────
GPT-4o | $0.00875 | $8.75 | $2,625.00
GPT-4o-mini | $0.00053 | $0.53 | $157.50
Claude 3.5 Sonnet | $0.01125 | $11.25 | $3,375.00
Claude 3 Haiku | $0.00094 | $0.94 | $281.25
Llama 3.1 70B | $0.00129 | $1.29 | $386.25
Llama 3.1 8B | $0.00012 | $0.12 | $35.40
Gemini 1.5 Pro | $0.00438 | $4.38 | $1,312.50
Gemini 1.5 Flash | $0.00021 | $0.21 | $63.75
Mistral Large | $0.00600 | $6.00 | $1,800.00
Mistral Small | $0.00060 | $0.60 | $180.00
3. Task-Based Recommendations
3.1 Classification
Task: Assignar input a uno de N categories
Requirements: Consistency, low cost, low latency
Recommended models (en order):
1. GPT-4o-mini — Best cost/accuracy ratio, 128K context, fast
2. Claude 3 Haiku — Good accuracy, slightly mas expensive
3. Gemini 1.5 Flash — Cheapest option, good para simple categories
4. Llama 3.1 8B — Self-hosted option, lowest cost
Not recommended:
- GPT-4o — Overkill para classification, 15x mas expensive
- Claude 3.5 — Overkill, 12x mas expensive que mini
3.2 Information Extraction
Task: Extraer structured data (entities, relationships, fields) de text
Requirements: Accuracy, structured output, schema adherence
Recommended models (en order):
1. GPT-4o — Best structured output, JSON mode, high accuracy
2. Claude 3.5 — Strong en extraction, good con complex schemas
3. GPT-4o-mini — Good para simple extraction, 15x cheaper
4. Gemini 1.5 Pro — Good para long-document extraction (2M context)
Considerations:
- Usa JSON mode / structured output cuando available
- Valida output schema en application code
- Para long documents (>100K tokens), usa Gemini 1.5 Pro o Claude 3.5
3.3 Summarization
Task: Condensar long text en un shorter summary
Requirements: Accuracy, coherence, context window para long inputs
Recommended models (en order):
1. Claude 3.5 Sonnet — Best summarization quality, 200K context
2. GPT-4o — Strong summarization, 128K context
3. Gemini 1.5 Pro — Best para very long documents (2M context)
4. Claude 3 Haiku — Good para short documents, lower cost
Considerations:
- Para documents < 10K tokens: any model trabaja well
- Para documents 10K-100K tokens: GPT-4o o Claude 3.5
- Para documents > 100K tokens: Gemini 1.5 Pro (2M context)
3.4 Code Generation y Review
Task: Generar, reviewar, o refactorear code
Requirements: Code accuracy, language support, reasoning ability
Recommended models (en order):
1. Claude 3.5 Sonnet — Best code reasoning, strong en refactoring
2. GPT-4o — Excellent code generation, broad language support
3. GPT-4o-mini — Good para simple code tasks, lower cost
4. Llama 3.1 70B — Good open-source option para self-hosting
Considerations:
- Para complex refactoring: Claude 3.5 Sonnet
- Para boilerplate generation: GPT-4o-mini
- Para code review: GPT-4o (best en identifying subtle bugs)
- Para self-hosting: Llama 3.1 70B con code-specific fine-tunes
3.5 RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation)
Task: Answer questions basado en retrieved context
Requirements: Faithfulness, context utilization, citation accuracy
Recommended models (en order):
1. GPT-4o — Best faithfulness, sigue context instructions well
2. Claude 3.5 Sonnet — Strong en synthesizing multiple chunks
3. Gemini 1.5 Pro — Best para large context windows (many chunks)
4. GPT-4o-mini — Good para simple Q&A, lower cost
Considerations:
- Faithfulness es critical — usa temperature 0
- Para multi-chunk synthesis: Claude 3.5 o GPT-4o
- Para large context (20+ chunks): Gemini 1.5 Pro
- Para cost-sensitive RAG: GPT-4o-mini con fewer chunks
3.6 Agent / Tool Use
Task: Multi-step reasoning con tool calls
Requirements: Tool selection accuracy, reasoning, instruction following
Recommended models (en order):
1. Claude 3.5 Sonnet — Best tool use, strong reasoning, function calling
2. GPT-4o — Excellent tool use, parallel function calling
3. GPT-4o-mini — Good para simple agents (1-3 tools)
4. Llama 3.1 70B — Open-source option con function calling
Considerations:
- Para complex agents (5+ tools): Claude 3.5 o GPT-4o
- Para simple agents (1-3 tools): GPT-4o-mini
- Para self-hosted agents: Llama 3.1 70B
- Testea tool selection accuracy antes de deployear
4. Decision Framework
Step 1: Cuál es el task type?
Classification → Empeza con GPT-4o-mini
Extraction → Empeza con GPT-4o
Summarization → Empeza con Claude 3.5
Code → Empeza con Claude 3.5
RAG → Empeza con GPT-4o
Agent → Empeza con Claude 3.5
Step 2: Cuál es el input size?
< 10K tokens → Any model trabaja
10K-100K tokens → GPT-4o, Claude 3.5, o Llama 3.1
100K-500K tokens → Claude 3.5 (200K) o Gemini 1.5 Pro (2M)
> 500K tokens → Gemini 1.5 Pro (2M context)
Step 3: Cuál es tu budget per 1000 queries?
< $1 → GPT-4o-mini, Gemini Flash, Llama 8B
$1-5 → GPT-4o, Gemini Pro, Llama 70B
$5-15 → Claude 3.5, GPT-4o, Mistral Large
> $15 → Any model (cost no es el constraint)
Step 4: Necesitas self-hostear?
Si → Llama 3.1 (8B o 70B dependiendo del hardware)
No → Any cloud model
Step 5: Necesitas multimodal (image input)?
Si → GPT-4o, Claude 3.5, Gemini 1.5
No → Any model
5. Benchmark Results
Benchmark: MMLU (general knowledge)
Model | Score
───────────────────┼──────
GPT-4o | 88.7%
Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 88.3%
Gemini 1.5 Pro | 85.9%
Llama 3.1 70B | 82.0%
GPT-4o-mini | 81.0%
Claude 3 Haiku | 75.2%
Gemini 1.5 Flash | 77.9%
Llama 3.1 8B | 68.5%
Benchmark: HumanEval (code generation)
Model | Score
───────────────────┼──────
Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 92.0%
GPT-4o | 90.2%
Gemini 1.5 Pro | 84.1%
Llama 3.1 70B | 80.5%
GPT-4o-mini | 87.0%
Claude 3 Haiku | 75.1%
Benchmark: Tool Use (function calling accuracy)
Model | Score
───────────────────┼──────
Claude 3.5 Sonnet | 95.0%
GPT-4o | 93.0%
GPT-4o-mini | 85.0%
Llama 3.1 70B | 78.0%
6. Fallback Strategy
# Multi-model fallback chain
FALLBACK_CHAIN = [
{"model": "gpt-4o", "timeout": 30, "retry": 2},
{"model": "claude-3-5-sonnet", "timeout": 30, "retry": 1},
{"model": "gpt-4o-mini", "timeout": 15, "retry": 1},
]
async def call_with_fallback(prompt: str, **kwargs):
for config in FALLBACK_CHAIN:
try:
response = await call_llm(
model=config["model"],
prompt=prompt,
timeout=config["timeout"],
retry_count=config["retry"],
**kwargs,
)
return response
except (TimeoutError, RateLimitError, ServiceUnavailableError):
continue # Try next model
raise Exception("All models in fallback chain failed")
Preguntas Frecuentes
¿Con qué frecuencia deberia re-evaluar mi model choice?
Re-evalua quarterly. Model providers releasean new versions frequentemente, y pricing cambia often. Corre tu test set contra new models cuando launchean. Trackea cost, latency, y quality metrics over time. Switchea models cuando un new model offerce better quality a lower cost, o cuando tu current model es deprecated.
¿Deberia usar el mismo model para all tasks?
No. Different tasks tienen different requirements. Usa cheap models (GPT-4o-mini, Claude Haiku) para simple tasks como classification y sentiment analysis. Usa premium models (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5) para complex tasks como code generation, extraction, y agent reasoning. Este mixed-model approach puede reduce costs by 50-80% comparado a usar un premium model para everything.
¿Cómo hago benchmark de models para mi specific use case?
Crea un test set de 100+ representative inputs con expected outputs. Corre cada model en el test set con temperature 0. Scorea los outputs usando: (1) automated metrics (exact match, F1, BLEU), (2) LLM-as-judge para subjective quality, (3) human review para un sample. Compara cost per 1000 queries, p95 latency, y quality score. Choosee el model que meetea tu quality threshold al lowest cost.
¿Cuándo deberia self-hostear vs usar un cloud API?
Self-hostea cuando: (1) tienes strict data privacy requirements, (2) tu query volume es high enough que API costs exceden GPU costs (tipicamente 100K+ queries/day), (3) necesitas sub-100ms latency, (4) necesitas fine-grained control sobre el model. Usa cloud APIs cuando: (1) query volume es low to medium, (2) necesitas el best available model, (3) queres avoid infrastructure management, (4) necesitas multimodal capabilities que open-source models no tienen.
¿Cuál es la diferencia entre GPT-4o y GPT-4o-mini?
GPT-4o es el full-capability model con el best reasoning, code generation, y complex task performance. GPT-4o-mini es un smaller, faster, cheaper variant que retiene most de la capability a 15x lower cost. Para most tasks (classification, simple extraction, summarization de short texts), GPT-4o-mini produce nearly identical results. Usa GPT-4o para complex reasoning, long-context tasks, y high-stakes generation donde quality mattera mas que cost.
See Also
Recursos Relacionados
AI LLM Cost Tracking Template
Track token usage and costs per feature, model, and user. Includes cost categories, pricing tables, budget alerts, optimization strategies, and reporting templates for LLM API spending.
DocAI LLM Prompt Template Library
A reusable prompt template library for common LLM tasks: summarization, extraction, classification, code review, translation, and structured output with variables, examples, and evaluation criteria.
DocAI Agent Design Document Template
Document AI agent architecture, tools, memory, reasoning patterns, safety guardrails, evaluation criteria, and deployment configuration. Includes sections for system prompts, tool definitions, and failure modes.
DocAI Data Preparation Checklist
Checklist for preparing data for LLM and RAG systems: data collection, cleaning, chunking, embedding, deduplication, PII removal, format validation, quality scoring, and indexing with metrics and thresholds.
DocAI Prompt Version Control Template
Version your LLM prompts with eval scores, change history, rollback support, and A/B testing. Includes prompt metadata schema, changelog format, evaluation tracking, and CI/CD integration for prompt management.