Meta Llama 3.1 405B Instruct vs Mistral Mistral 8x22B
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Mistral Mistral 8x22B is the more secure of the two: Llama 3.1 405B Instruct scores 36.0% and Mistral 8x22B scores 31.5% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
Mistral 8x22B is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Meta Llama 3.1 405B Instruct vs Mistral Mistral 8x22B. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Mistral Mistral 8x22B has a lower Overall (ASR).
- Mistral Mistral 8x22B has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Meta Llama 3.1 405B Instruct or Mistral Mistral 8x22B more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Mistral Mistral 8x22B is the more secure of the two: Llama 3.1 405B Instruct scores 36.0% and Mistral 8x22B scores 31.5% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Llama 3.1 405B Instruct vs Mistral 8x22B?
Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has a 36.0% ASR and Mistral 8x22B has a 31.5% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Llama 3.1 405B Instruct and Mistral 8x22B tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.