Model Comparison
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Llama 3 Instruct 8B
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Nous Research, Meta
Recommended Pick
No Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding
Best Value
Llama 3 Instruct 8B
100.0 value score
18.2 reasoning / $0.07/1M
Lowest Price
Llama 3 Instruct 8B
$0.04/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning)
21.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning)
18.1 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
Llama 3 Instruct 8B has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Llama 3 Instruct 8B is 22.2x cheaper on input tokens than Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Llama 3 Instruct 8B generates about 2.1x as many tokens per second as Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) leads Llama 3 Instruct 8B by 3.0 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) leads Llama 3 Instruct 8B by 14.1 points on coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning)
Nous Research
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Llama 3 Instruct 8B
Meta
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick No Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) | Me Llama 3 Instruct 8B |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $1.00/1M | $0.04/1M |
| Output Cost | $3.00/1M | $0.14/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.50/1M | $0.07/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Nous Research | Meta |
| Release Date | Aug 27, 2025 | Apr 18, 2024 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 39.1 tok/s | 83.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 752ms | 496ms |
| Latency | 752ms | 496ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 5.4 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 21.2 | 18.2 |
| Intelligence | 17.6 | 6.4 |
| Coding | 18.1 | 4.0 |
| Math | 15.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 53.6% | 29.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 72.9% | 40.5% |
| HLE | 4.2% | 5.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 54.6% | 9.6% |
| MATH 500 | — | 49.9% |
| AIME 2025 | 15.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | — | 0.0% |
| SciCode | 34.6% | 11.9% |
| LCR | 20.0% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 34.8% | 24.6% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 26.6% | 0.0% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 9.8% | 0.0% |
Key Takeaways
Llama 3 Instruct 8B offers the best value at $0.04/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 21.2 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 18.1 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 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Llama 3 Instruct 8B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
