Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen Flash
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen Flash 68, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.
NVIDIALlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
65/100- ECI—
- PriceFree / Free
- Context128K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Flash
68/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Qwen Flash 68/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B on price and Qwen Flash for long inputs. 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 · Qwen Flash $0.138 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen FlashQwen Flash 1,000,000 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text · Qwen Flash: Text
- Self-hostingLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B | Qwen Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 91 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 68/100 |
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 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIA | Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | Free (best) | $0.05 |
| Output | Free (best) | $0.40 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | Free (best) | $0.138 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Nvidia API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | nvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1 | qwen-flash |
| API providers | 1 | 6 (best) |
| Released | Apr 7, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BFree
- Qwen Flash$1.30
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen Flash?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 3 points (Qwen Flash 68/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B on price and Qwen Flash for long inputs. 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, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen Flash?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). Qwen Flash costs $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B has not been scored yet and Qwen Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B and Qwen Flash 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?
Qwen Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 128,000 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B. Maximum output per response: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192, Qwen Flash up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text; Qwen Flash accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B came out Apr 7, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen Flash Apr 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 GLM-4.5-FlashThree-way comparison
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs GLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Nova 2 ProAmazon
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Laguna M.1Poolside
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Aya Vision 32BCohere
- Qwen Flash vs Voxtral Small 24B 2507Mistral AI
- Qwen Flash vs Apertus 8BSwiss AI
