Model comparison
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b vs Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.3 to 35.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b scores higher in 0 categories and Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads 53.1 to 39.7.
Side by side
| Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Allen Institute for AI (Ai2) | NVIDIA |
| Noometry Index | 35.7 | 40.3 |
| Released | — | 2025-07-25 |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | 131K |
| Max output | — | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 11 | 12 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 34.4 (#235), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 39.8 (#154)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1183 | 1355 |
Reasoning Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 22.8 (#188), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 26.8 (#128)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1174 | 1336 |
Math Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 33.9 (#198), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 38.2 (#141)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1195 | 1392 |
Knowledge Not comparable
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: —, Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 36.7 (#165)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | — | 1330 |
Multilingual Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 35.4 (#246), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 45.5 (#168)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1169 | 1316 |
| LMArena Russian | 1193 | 1332 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1176 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1300 |
Instruction Following Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 61.3 (#246), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 68.6 (#188)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1174 | 1299 |
Long Context Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 35.8 (#239), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 40.0 (#164)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1181 | 1315 |
Writing & Preference Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 leads
Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b: 39.7 (#245), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 53.1 (#159)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b | Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1193 | 1338 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1182 | 1307 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1154 | 1334 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b better than Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5?
Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 40.3 to 35.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b or Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 better for coding?
Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.8 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b and Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1 Tulu 3 8b has 11 scored results on Noometry and Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 has 12.