Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B comes out ahead, 65 to 51 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
NVIDIALlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
65/100- ECI—
- PriceFree / Free
- Context128K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.35 / $1.05
- Context131K
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 Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct (51). It leads on price. Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct wins 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 priceLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B Free · Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct $0.525 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen2.5-VL 7B InstructQwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct 131,072 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen2.5-VL 7B InstructLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text · Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct: Text, Images
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B | Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 63 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 50 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 51/100 |
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 | Qwen2.5-VL 7B InstructAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | Free (best) | $0.35 |
| Output | Free (best) | $1.05 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | Free (best) | $0.525 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Nvidia API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Open |
| API model ID | nvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1 | qwen2-5-vl-7b-instruct |
| API providers | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Apr 7, 2025 | Sep 2024 |
| 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
- Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct$5.60
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct (51). It leads on price. Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct wins 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, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct costs $0.35 input / $1.05 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 Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct 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 Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct 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?
Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct has the largest context window at 131,072 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, Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text; Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct accepts text and images. Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct handles the widest range of inputs.
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. Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct came out Sep 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct 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
- Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct vs CodestralMistral AI
- Qwen2.5-VL 7B Instruct vs Aya Expanse 32BCohere
