LLM ReferenceLLM Reference

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct vs Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct (2024) and Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 (2025) are compact production models from AI at Meta and NVIDIA AI. Llama 3.1 405B Instruct ships a 128K-token context window, while Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 ships a not-yet-sourced context window. On pricing, Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 costs $0.04/1M input tokens versus $2.4/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.

Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 is ~5900% cheaper at $0.04/1M; pay for Llama 3.1 405B Instruct only for provider fit.

Decision scorecard

Local evidence first
SignalLlama 3.1 405B InstructNemotron-Nano-9B-v2
Decision fitRAG, Long context, and ClassificationClassification and JSON / Tool use
Context window128K—
Cheapest output$2.4/1M tokens$0.16/1M tokens
Provider routes11 tracked2 tracked
Shared benchmarks0 rows0 rows

Decision tradeoffs

Choose Llama 3.1 405B Instruct when...
  • Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
  • Llama 3.1 405B Instruct has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
  • Local decision data tags Llama 3.1 405B Instruct for RAG, Long context, and Classification.
Choose Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 when...
  • Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.16/1M tokens.
  • Local decision data tags Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 for Classification and JSON / Tool use.

Monthly cost at traffic

Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.

Lower estimate Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct

$2,520

Cheapest tracked route: AWS Bedrock

Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2

$72.00

Cheapest tracked route: OpenRouter

Estimated monthly gap: $2,448. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.

Switch friction

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct -> Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2
  • Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 is $2.24/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 -> Llama 3.1 405B Instruct
  • Provider overlap exists on NVIDIA NIM; start route-level A/B tests there.
  • Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is $2.24/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.

Specs

Specification
Released2024-07-232025-08-18
Context window128K—
Parameters405B9B
Architecturedecoder onlydecoder only
LicenseOpen SourceUnknown
Knowledge cutoff--

Pricing and availability

Pricing attributeLlama 3.1 405B InstructNemotron-Nano-9B-v2
Input price$2.4/1M tokens$0.04/1M tokens
Output price$2.4/1M tokens$0.16/1M tokens
Providers

Capabilities

CapabilityLlama 3.1 405B InstructNemotron-Nano-9B-v2
VisionNoNo
MultimodalNoNo
ReasoningNoNo
Function callingNoNo
Tool useNoNo
Structured outputsYesYes
Code executionNoNo

Benchmarks

No shared benchmark rows are currently sourced for this pair.

Deep dive

The capability footprint is close: both models cover structured outputs. That makes context budget, benchmark fit, and provider maturity more important than a simple checklist. If your application depends on one integration detail, verify it against the provider route you plan to use, not just the base model listing.

For cost, Llama 3.1 405B Instruct lists $2.4/1M input and $2.4/1M output tokens, while Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 lists $0.04/1M input and $0.16/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 lower by about $2.32 per million blended tokens. Availability is 11 providers versus 2, so concentration risk also matters.

Choose Llama 3.1 405B Instruct when provider fit and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 when provider fit and lower input-token cost are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship. This keeps the decision grounded in measurable tradeoffs instead of brand-level assumptions. It also helps separate model capability from provider packaging, which can change cost and latency. For teams standardizing a stack, that distinction is often the difference between a benchmark win and a reliable deployment.

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1 405B Instruct or Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2?

Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Llama 3.1 405B Instruct costs $2.4/1M input and $2.4/1M output tokens. Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 costs $0.04/1M input and $0.16/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.

Is Llama 3.1 405B Instruct or Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 open source?

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is listed under Open Source. Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 is listed under Unknown. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.

Which is better for structured outputs, Llama 3.1 405B Instruct or Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2?

Both Llama 3.1 405B Instruct and Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 expose structured outputs. The better choice depends on benchmark fit, context budget, pricing, and whether your provider route exposes the same capability surface.

Where can I run Llama 3.1 405B Instruct and Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2?

Llama 3.1 405B Instruct is available on OctoAI API (Deprecated), Together AI, Fireworks AI, IBM watsonx, and Scale AI GenAI Platform. Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 is available on NVIDIA NIM and OpenRouter. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.

When should I pick Llama 3.1 405B Instruct over Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2?

Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2 is ~5900% cheaper at $0.04/1M; pay for Llama 3.1 405B Instruct only for provider fit. If your workload also depends on provider fit, start with Llama 3.1 405B Instruct; if it depends on provider fit, run the same evaluation with Nemotron-Nano-9B-v2.

Continue comparing

Last reviewed: 2026-05-16. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.