Model Comparison
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Google, Nous Research
Recommended Pick
Go Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) 7 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
21.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Price gap
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B.
Reasoning gap
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B leads Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) by 4.0 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) wins 7 measurable categories, including Input price, Output price, TTFT, Latency.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
Nous Research
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Go Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) | No Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.30/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Nous Research | |
| Release Date | Apr 2, 2026 | Aug 15, 2024 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 30.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 341ms |
| Latency | — | 341ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 17.1 | 21.1 |
| Intelligence | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.5% | 40.1% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 57.1% |
| HLE | 4.5% | 4.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 18.8% |
| MATH 500 | — | 53.8% |
| AIME (Original) | — | 2.3% |
| SciCode | 20.4% | 23.1% |
| LCR | 15.0% | — |
| IFBench | 33.6% | — |
| TAU-bench v2 | 22.2% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 2.3% | — |
Key Takeaways
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B has the strongest reasoning profile with a 21.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Gemma 4 E2B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
