Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.10Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026Not reported
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026Not reported
Context windowMaximum documented tokens10,000K1,049K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,279.2996% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1274.57681953, 1284.00026285]; votes 29740; rank 2591,330.72100% of row best · rating · nvidia-nemotron-3.5-lightning-30b-a3b-nvfp4; 95% CI [1323.44362436, 1337.99938875]; votes 8338; rank 213
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark winsNo overall winner1 benchmark winNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B
DeveloperMetaNVIDIA
FamilyLlama 4 Scout 17b 16e InstructNvidia Nemotron 3 5 Lightning
ModelLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B
VersionLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B-A3B
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2025-04-052026-08-11
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window10,000K1,049K
Total parameters108.6B30B
Active parameters17B3B
Licenseotheropenmdw-1.1
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Fireworks Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolsagents, chat, generation, reasoning, tools

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct

NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B Capabilities

agentschatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDnvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3B-BF16

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B FAQs

Is Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?+

Only Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has a directly sourced input price: $0.10 per million tokens. Only Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has a directly sourced output price: $0.30 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has the larger sourced context window. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct supports 10,000K and NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is open weight; NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is open weight.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B understand images?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is documented with image input; NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is — and NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is —.

Do Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct: tool calling and image input. NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has 4 sourced provider routes; NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B has 1, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback