ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B

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.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen Flash

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    68/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.05 / $0.40
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen Flash

  2. 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

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

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 inputsQwen Flash: Text · Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B: Text
  • Self-hostingLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen FlashLlama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B
Price50%91100
Inputs & features30%3535
Context window20%6024
Overall100%68/10065/100

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.

Qwen Flash vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen)Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BNVIDIA
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.05Free (best)
Output$0.40Free (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.138Free (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Nvidia API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDqwen-flashnvidia/llama-3.1-nemotron-ultra-253b-v1
API providers6 (best)1
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Apr 7, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 2024—
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.

  • Qwen Flash$1.30
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253BFree
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen Flash or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B?

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, Qwen Flash 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). 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. Qwen Flash 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 Qwen Flash 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?

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: Qwen Flash up to 32,768, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen Flash accepts text; Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons