Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B comes out ahead, 65 to 33 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Mistral AIPixtral Large (25.02)
33/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $6.00
- Context128K
- Our pick
NVIDIALlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
65/100- ECI—
- PriceFree / Free
- Context128K
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 Pixtral Large (25.02) (33). It leads on price. Pixtral Large (25.02) 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 · Pixtral Large (25.02) $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the samePixtral Large (25.02) 128,000 · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsPixtral Large (25.02)Pixtral Large (25.02): Text, Images · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text
- Self-hostingLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Pixtral Large (25.02) | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 27 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 50 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 33/100 | 65/100 |
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 | Pixtral Large (25.02)Mistral AI | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.00 | Free (best) |
| Output | $6.00 | Free (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.00 | Free (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Official Nvidia API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | nvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1 |
| API providers | 3 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Apr 8, 2025 | Apr 7, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Pixtral Large (25.02)$32.00
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BFree
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Pixtral Large (25.02) or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Pixtral Large (25.02) (33). It leads on price. Pixtral Large (25.02) 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, Pixtral Large (25.02) or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B is cheaper at Free input / Free output per million tokens (official Nvidia API price). Pixtral Large (25.02) costs $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). 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. Pixtral Large (25.02) has not been scored yet and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Pixtral Large (25.02) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 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?
Pixtral Large (25.02) and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B share the same 128,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Pixtral Large (25.02) up to 8,192, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Pixtral Large (25.02) accepts text and images; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B accepts text. Pixtral Large (25.02) 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; Pixtral Large (25.02) is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Pixtral Large (25.02) is the newest, released Apr 8, 2025. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B came out Apr 7, 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructThree-way comparison
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Qwen3-Coder 480B-A35B InstructAlibaba (Qwen)
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Jamba LargeAI21 Labs
- Pixtral Large (25.02) vs Command ACohere
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs GLM-4.5-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B vs Nova 2 ProAmazon
