Codestral vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B comes out ahead, 65 to 48 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Mistral AICodestral
48/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.90
- Context256K
- Our pick
NVIDIALlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
65/100- ECI—
- PriceFree / Free
- Context128K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is our pick
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Codestral (48). It leads on price and inputs & features. Codestral wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B Free · Codestral $0.45 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextCodestralCodestral 256,000 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsCodestral: Text · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Codestral | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 66 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 36 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 48/100 | 65/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | CodestralMistral AI | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.30 | Free (best) |
| Output | $0.90 | Free (best) |
| Cached input | $0.03 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.45 | Free (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Mistral API | Official Nvidia API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 4,096 tokens | 8,192 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | codestral-latest | nvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1 |
| API providers | 3 (best) | 1 |
| Released | May 29, 2024 | Apr 7, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Oct 2024 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Codestral$4.80
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BFree
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Codestral or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Codestral (48). It leads on price and inputs & features. Codestral wins on context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Codestral or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). Codestral costs $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is listed as free.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Codestral has not been scored yet and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Codestral and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Codestral has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B. Maximum output per response: Codestral up to 4,096, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Codestral accepts text; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is the newest, released Apr 7, 2025. Codestral came out May 29, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Codestral Oct 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen2.5-VL 7B InstructThree-way comparison
- Codestral vs Qwen2.5-VL 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Codestral vs Command RCohere
- Codestral vs Llama-3.2-11B-Vision-InstructMeta
- Codestral vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B InstructNVIDIA
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs GLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Nova 2 ProAmazon
