+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Gemma 3n E4B vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct leads with 9.1% higher average benchmark score. Gemma 3n E4B supports multimodal inputs. Overall, Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3N E4B was developed as a slightly larger edge-optimized variant, designed to provide enhanced capabilities while still fitting within edge computing constraints. Built to serve applications that can accommodate more parameters for improved quality, it expands the range of edge deployment options.
+
+
+
+
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
2025-06-26
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Average performance across 3 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Average Score:70.6%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Average Score:79.8%(+9.1%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
2023-12-01
Gemma 3n E4B
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
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Gemma 3n E4B
Avg Score:70.6%
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Avg Score:79.8%(+9.1%)
Providers:0