ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B comes out ahead, 65 to 28 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    NVIDIA

    Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

    Released Apr 7, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • PriceFree / Free
    • Context128K
    Full specs Remove Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct

    Released Apr 2025

    28/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.50 / $7.50
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

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 Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct (28). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct 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 · Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct 262,144 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text · Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct
Price50%10027
Inputs & features30%3525
Context window20%2437
Overall100%65/10028/100

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 Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIAQwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
InputFree (best)$1.50
OutputFree (best)$7.50
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)Free (best)$3.00
Long-context rateSame rateOver 32K: $2.70 / $13.50
Price sourceOfficial Nvidia APIOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window128,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model IDnvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1qwen3-coder-480b-a35b-instruct
API providers17 (best)
ReleasedApr 7, 2025Apr 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Apr 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
  • Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct$30.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct (28). It leads on price and inputs & features. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct 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, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B or Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct costs $1.50 input / $7.50 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 Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B 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 Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B 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?

Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct has the largest context window at 262,144 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, Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text; Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct 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. Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct came out Apr 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B Instruct 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons