+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3 4B vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct leads with 2.2% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3 4B supports multimodal inputs. Both models have their strengths depending on your specific coding needs.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B was developed as a compact yet capable open-source model, designed to strike a balance between performance and resource efficiency. Built with 4 billion parameters and instruction tuning, it provides a practical option for applications requiring moderate capability with manageable computational costs.
+
+
+
+
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B was developed by NVIDIA through customization of Meta's Llama 3.1 70B, designed to enhance performance for specific use cases and deployments. Built with NVIDIA's optimizations and fine-tuning expertise, it demonstrates how foundation models can be adapted for specialized applications.
5 months newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
2024-10-01
Gemma 3 4B
2025-03-12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Average Score:89.2%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Average Score:91.4%(+2.2%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
2023-12-01
Gemma 3 4B
2024-08-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
1 providers
DeepInfra
Throughput: 33 tok/s
Latency: 0.2ms
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3 4B
Avg Score:89.2%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Avg Score:91.4%(+2.2%)
Providers:0