Model Comparison
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Nous Research, Allen Institute for AI
Recommended Pick
No Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) 7 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Intelligence, GPQA
Lowest Price
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B
32.1 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
Price gap
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B leads Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) by 10.9 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Hermes 4 - Llama-3.1 405B (Non-reasoning) wins 7 measurable categories, including Throughput, Intelligence, GPQA, MMLU Pro.
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 3.1 Tulu3 405B
Allen Institute for AI
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) | Al Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $1.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $3.00/1M | $0.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.50/1M | — |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Nous Research | Allen Institute for AI |
| Release Date | Aug 27, 2025 | Jan 30, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 39.1 tok/s | — |
| TTFT | 752ms | — |
| Latency | 752ms | — |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | — |
| Reasoning Score | 21.2 | 32.1 |
| Intelligence | 17.6 | 14.1 |
| Coding | 18.1 | — |
| Math | 15.3 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 53.6% | 51.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 72.9% | 71.6% |
| HLE | 4.2% | 3.5% |
| LiveCodeBench | 54.6% | 29.1% |
| MATH 500 | — | 77.8% |
| AIME 2025 | 15.3% | — |
| AIME (Original) | — | 13.3% |
| SciCode | 34.6% | 30.2% |
| LCR | 20.0% | — |
| IFBench | 34.8% | — |
| TAU-bench v2 | 26.6% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 9.8% | — |
Key Takeaways
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B has the strongest reasoning profile with a 32.1 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)
- Code generation
- Software development
Llama 3.1 Tulu3 405B
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
