GLM-4.5-Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct vs Mistral Nemotron
GLM-4.5-Flash comes out ahead, 65 to 62 and 45 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.5-Flash
65/100- ECI—
- PriceFree / Free
- Context131K
NVIDIALlama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
45/100- ECI—
- Price$0.478 / $0.504
- Context128K
- NVIDIA
Mistral Nemotron
62/100- ECI—
- PriceFree / Free
- Context128K
GLM-4.5-Flash is our pick
GLM-4.5-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Mistral Nemotron (62) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (45). It leads on inputs & features. 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 priceGLM-4.5-Flash and Mistral NemotronGLM-4.5-Flash Free · Mistral Nemotron Free · Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct $0.485 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGLM-4.5-FlashGLM-4.5-Flash 131,072 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct 128,000 · Mistral Nemotron 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGLM-4.5-Flash: Text · Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct: Text · Mistral Nemotron: Text
- Self-hostingLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct and Mistral NemotronPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | GLM-4.5-Flash | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct | Mistral Nemotron |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 65 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 25 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 45/100 | 62/100 |
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 | GLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu) | Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B InstructNVIDIA | Mistral NemotronNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | Free (best) | $0.478 | Free (best) |
| Output | Free (best) | $0.504 | Free (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | Free (best) | $0.485 | Free (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Z.AI API | Median of 2 providers | Official Nvidia API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 98,304 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Open |
| API model ID | glm-4.5-flash | nvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-70b-instruct | mistralai/mistral-nemotron |
| API providers | 4 (best) | 3 | 1 |
| Released | Jul 28, 2025 | Apr 15, 2025 | Jun 11, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2025 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GLM-4.5-FlashFree
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct$5.79
- Mistral NemotronFree
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GLM-4.5-Flash, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct or Mistral Nemotron?
GLM-4.5-Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Mistral Nemotron (62) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct (45). It leads on inputs & features. 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, GLM-4.5-Flash, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct or Mistral Nemotron?
GLM-4.5-Flash is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price). Mistral Nemotron costs Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price); Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct costs $0.478 input / $0.504 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers; free on Nvidia). GLM-4.5-Flash is listed as free.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GLM-4.5-Flash has not been scored yet, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct has not been scored yet and Mistral Nemotron has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GLM-4.5-Flash, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct and Mistral Nemotron yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
GLM-4.5-Flash has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct and 128,000 for Mistral Nemotron. Maximum output per response: GLM-4.5-Flash up to 98,304, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct up to 8,192, Mistral Nemotron up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GLM-4.5-Flash accepts text; Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct accepts text; Mistral Nemotron accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct and Mistral Nemotron publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; GLM-4.5-Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
GLM-4.5-Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Mistral Nemotron came out Jun 11, 2025; Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct came out Apr 15, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.5-Flash Apr 2025.
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.
