Model Comparison
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
vs. Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Nous Research, NVIDIA
Recommended Pick
NV Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) 7 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Throughput, Reasoning
Best Value
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
45.1 reasoning / $0.41/1M
Lowest Price
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
$0.30/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning)
45.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning)
31.2 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Speed gap
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) generates about 4.6x as many tokens per second as Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B.
Reasoning gap
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) leads Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B by 22.9 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) wins 7 measurable categories, including Value, Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
Nous Research
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning)
NVIDIA
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | No Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B | Top Pick NV Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.30/1M | $0.75/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.30/1M | $0.41/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Nous Research | NVIDIA |
| Release Date | Aug 15, 2024 | Mar 11, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 32.4 tok/s | 150.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 389ms | 1078ms |
| Latency | 389ms | 14398ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 67.7 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 22.2 | 45.1 |
| Intelligence | 10.6 | 36.0 |
| Coding | — | 31.2 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.1% | 80.0% |
| MMLU Pro | 57.1% | — |
| HLE | 4.1% | 19.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 18.8% | — |
| MATH 500 | 53.8% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 2.3% | — |
| SciCode | 23.1% | 36.0% |
| LCR | — | 60.0% |
| IFBench | — | 71.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 67.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 28.8% |
Key Takeaways
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B offers the best value at $0.30/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 45.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning) reaches a 31.2 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Hermes 3 - Llama-3.1 70B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
