+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct leads with 15.3% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3N E4B IT was created as the instruction-tuned version of Gemma 3N E4B, designed to combine improved capability with edge optimization. Built for applications requiring both responsive instruction-following and edge-friendly efficiency, it serves as a stronger option for on-device AI assistants.
+
+
+
+
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.
8 months newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
2024-10-01
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Average Score:64.9%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Average Score:80.2%(+15.3%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
2023-12-01
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
2024-06-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
1 providers
Together
Throughput: 42.09 tok/s
Latency: 0.43ms
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Avg Score:64.9%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Avg Score:80.2%(+15.3%)
Providers:0