+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 leads with 29.0% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 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 Nano 8B was created as a compact variant optimized by NVIDIA, designed to bring Llama 3.1 capabilities to more efficient deployments. Built with NVIDIA's efficiency optimizations, it serves applications requiring strong performance with reduced resource requirements.
3 months newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
NVIDIA
2025-03-18
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Average Score:33.0%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
Average Score:61.9%(+29.0%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
2023-12-31
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 Nano 8B V1
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed
Avg Score:33.0%
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
Avg Score:61.9%(+29.0%)
Providers:0