Model Comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning)
vs. Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · NVIDIA
Recommended Pick
NV Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Input price, Output price, TTFT
Lowest Price
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning)
$0.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning)
46.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning)
15.8 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 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) is ∞x cheaper on input tokens than Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) leads Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning) by 29.7 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) wins 11 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.
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning)
NVIDIA
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning)
NVIDIA
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick NV Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) | NV Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.05/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.00/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $0.09/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Release Date | May 20, 2025 | Dec 15, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 80.1 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 292ms |
| Latency | — | 292ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | — | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 46.5 | 16.9 |
| Intelligence | 14.4 | 13.2 |
| Coding | — | 15.8 |
| Math | 50.0 | 13.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 40.8% | 39.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 55.6% | 57.9% |
| HLE | 5.1% | 4.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | 49.3% | 36.0% |
| MATH 500 | 94.7% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 50.0% | 13.3% |
| AIME (Original) | 70.7% | — |
| SciCode | 10.1% | 23.0% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 6.7% |
| IFBench | 25.5% | 37.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 11.7% | 25.4% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 12.1% |
Key Takeaways
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.00/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 46.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 15.8 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
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 4B v1.1 (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B (Non-reasoning)
- Code generation
- Software development
