Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads Llama 3.1 8B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.9 to 6.9, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs 1.8x less per output token ($0.08 vs $0.147 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 5 benchmarks have a result for both.

Llama 3.1 8B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
17.9
Output $/M
$0.08
0
Nemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIA
Coding
22.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.147
5
vs boards won of 5 shared

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: which to pick

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 3.1 8B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($0.08 vs $0.147 per million).

Shared results
5
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct only
46
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
15
Like-for-like categories
4 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct not benchmarked, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
General, 42.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): Llama 3.1 8B Instruct 25.9% against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 74.3%, 48.4 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct $0.08 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 per million output tokens, 1.8x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.1 8B Instruct takes 131K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryLlama 3.1 8B InstructBarsNemotron 3.5 LightningTies
Coding01
Intelligence01
Reasoning02
General01
All shared boards05
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Coding Index5.426.8Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured3.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured10.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured29.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)11.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
SciCodeNot measured32.1%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
WeirdML1.7%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
ALE-BenchNot measured769.2Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
LMArena Text: coding1195Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1195Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 25 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.912.9Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Epoch Capabilities Index116.5Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured3.5Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured18.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.6%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured17.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
τ²-Bench Telecom16.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
BALROG15.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)25.8%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)25.9%74.3%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%10.6%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)27.0%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1175Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: expert1144Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1196Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Math Index4.3Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIME1.7%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MATH level 522.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
GSM8K82.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: math1179Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1180Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured54.2%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)47.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
MMLU56.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science1193Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1182Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1206Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1166Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
General benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured4.3%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
IFBench28.6%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)18.0%60.3%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
DTBench50.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMCA5.4%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
PIQA81.2%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text1187Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1159Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1154Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: English1218Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: non-English1148Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1151Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: German1144Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1061Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Korean1053Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: French1178Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1169Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Russian1158Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1172Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1181Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1162Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1145Not measuredOnly Llama 3.1 8B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkLlama 3.1 8B InstructNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0001Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0001Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.0027Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0031Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct$0.011Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.012Fits in one request

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Llama 3.1 8B Instruct and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.1 8B InstructNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
MakerMeta LlamaNVIDIA
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 23, 2024August 11, 2026
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.05$0.0534
Output $/Mtok$0.08$0.147
Coding indexNot benchmarked22.6
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.06
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.1 8B Instruct better than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning for coding?

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Llama 3.1 8B Instruct has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.1 8B Instruct for output tokens 1.8x cheaper ($0.08 vs $0.147 per million).

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

Llama 3.1 8B Instruct costs $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 and $0.147. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.1 8B Instruct vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning comparison based on?

5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.1 8B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next