+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct vs Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct leads with 5.8% higher average benchmark score. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports multimodal inputs. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is available on 5 providers. Overall, Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
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.
+
+
+
+
Meta
Llama 3.2 90B was developed as a flagship-tier open-source model, designed to provide advanced capabilities with 90 billion parameters. Built to serve applications requiring high-quality reasoning and generation, it represents a powerful option within the Llama 3.2 series for demanding tasks.
6 days newer
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
2024-09-25
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
2024-10-01
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Average Score:80.2%
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Average Score:86.0%(+5.8%)
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
2023-12-01
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
0 providers
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
5 providers
Bedrock
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Avg Score:80.2%
Providers:0
+
+
+
+
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Avg Score:86.0%(+5.8%)
Providers:5