ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen-VL OCR vs GLM-4.5-Flash

Too close to call on our weighted score (GLM-4.5-Flash 65, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65, Qwen-VL OCR 36). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. NVIDIA

    Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

    Released Apr 7, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context128K
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen-VL OCR

    Released Oct 28, 2024

    36/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.72 / $0.72
    • Context34K
  3. Z.ai (Zhipu)

    GLM-4.5-Flash

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context131K
01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.5-Flash 65/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100, Qwen-VL OCR 36/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B on price and GLM-4.5-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 253B and GLM-4.5-FlashLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B Free · GLM-4.5-Flash Free · Qwen-VL OCR $0.72 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGLM-4.5-FlashGLM-4.5-Flash 131,072 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen-VL OCRLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text · Qwen-VL OCR: Text, Images · GLM-4.5-Flash: Text
  • Self-hostingLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BQwen-VL OCRGLM-4.5-Flash
Price50%10057100
Inputs & features30%352535
Context window20%24124
Overall100%65/10036/10065/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen-VL OCR vs GLM-4.5-Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIAQwen-VL OCRAlibaba (Qwen)GLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
InputFree (best)$0.72Free (best)
OutputFree (best)$0.72Free (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)Free (best)$0.72Free (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Nvidia APIOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Z.AI API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens34,096 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens4,096 tokens98,304 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesNoYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryProprietary
API model IDnvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1qwen-vl-ocrglm-4.5-flash
API providers114 (best)
ReleasedApr 7, 2025Oct 28, 2024Jul 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Apr 2024Apr 2025
03 — Cost

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-VL OCR$8.64
  • GLM-4.5-FlashFree
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B, Qwen-VL OCR or GLM-4.5-Flash?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (GLM-4.5-Flash 65/100, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 65/100, Qwen-VL OCR 36/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B on price and GLM-4.5-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, Qwen-VL OCR or GLM-4.5-Flash?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). GLM-4.5-Flash costs Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); Qwen-VL OCR costs $0.72 input / $0.72 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 all three models yet. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B has not been scored yet, Qwen-VL OCR has not been scored yet and GLM-4.5-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, Qwen-VL OCR and GLM-4.5-Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

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 Ultra 253B and 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192, Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096, GLM-4.5-Flash up to 98,304 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text; Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images; GLM-4.5-Flash accepts text. Qwen-VL OCR handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen-VL OCR and GLM-4.5-Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

GLM-4.5-Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B came out Apr 7, 2025; Qwen-VL OCR came out Oct 28, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-VL OCR Apr 2024, 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.