Noometry

Model comparison

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct vs Qwen3.5-Flash

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct NVIDIA

37.6

Rank #203 Confirmed

Qwen3.5-Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

42.5

Rank #112 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.5-Flash in 7 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in multilingual, where Qwen3.5-Flash leads 50.5 to 40.5.
  • Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
ProviderNVIDIAAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index37.642.5
Released2024-12-182026-02-23
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1M
Max output—66K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.10
Output $ / M tokens—$0.40
Results tracked1432

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 35.9 (#216), Qwen3.5-Flash: 34.2 (#242)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Coding12721412
LMArena WebDev—1244
BigCodeBench Instruct38.7%—
BigCodeBench Complete48.2%—
ALE-Bench—221.8

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: —, Qwen3.5-Flash: —

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
Vending-Bench 2—462.69

Reasoning Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 25.0 (#152), Qwen3.5-Flash: 33.7 (#72)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts12661403
Chess Puzzles—21%
Mystery Game Puzzles—20%
DTBench—82.9%
LMCA—29.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index—143.98

Math Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 35.5 (#182), Qwen3.5-Flash: 37.4 (#158)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Math12711407
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—18.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—84.4%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—6.2%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 34.1 (#199), Qwen3.5-Flash: 43.2 (#93)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Expert12421407
GPQA Diamond—82.3%
SimpleQA Verified—20.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multilingual Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 40.5 (#217), Qwen3.5-Flash: 50.5 (#121)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Non-English12451385
LMArena Chinese12631446
LMArena Russian12271379
LMArena French—1412
LMArena German—1390
LMArena Japanese—1368
LMArena Korean—1344
LMArena Spanish—1400

Instruction Following Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 65.9 (#213), Qwen3.5-Flash: 72.6 (#139)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Instruction Following12521374

Long Context Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 37.6 (#215), Qwen3.5-Flash: 42.4 (#124)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Longer Query12381392

Writing & Preference Qwen3.5-Flash leads

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct: 48.4 (#203), Qwen3.5-Flash: 57.9 (#122)

BenchmarkLlama 3.1 Nemotron 70b InstructQwen3.5-Flash
LMArena Text12831397
LMArena Creative Writing12691343
LMArena Multi-Turn12751393

Frequently asked questions

Is Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct better than Qwen3.5-Flash?

Qwen3.5-Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 42.5 to 37.6 on the Noometry Index.

Is Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct or Qwen3.5-Flash better for coding?

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.9 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct and Qwen3.5-Flash share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70b Instruct has 14 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5-Flash has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper