Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.
NVIDIASummary
- They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 37.5.
- Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | NVIDIA |
| Noometry Index | 60.7 | 36.7 |
| Released | 2026-05-28 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $5 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $25 | — |
| Results tracked | 65 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 38.4 (#177)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1490 | 1312 |
| DeepSWE | 59% | — |
| FrontierCode | 46.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1556 | — |
| SciCode | 53.5% | — |
| GSO | 47.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 82.9% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,564 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 15.7 (#149)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 48.9% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 10% |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 20.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 8.3% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 50.2% | — |
| PostTrainBench | 33.8% | — |
| GBAEval | 70.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 24% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1204 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,787 | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 26.3 (#134)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1482 | 1316 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 72.1% | — |
| SimpleBench | 64.8% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 91.1% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | — |
| CritPt | 20.9% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 34% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 23.5% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 28.6% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 36% | — |
| DTBench | 94.9% | — |
| LMCA | 57.5% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 87.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.14 | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 158.21 | — |
| ForecastBench | 59.9 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 37.5 (#152)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1487 | 1360 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 80% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 91.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 98.3% | — |
| ProofBench | 69% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 47.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 31.3% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 91% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 53% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: —
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1294 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 14.5% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 42.5% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1475 | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 43.1 (#187)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1450 | 1282 |
| LMArena Russian | 1474 | 1284 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1507 | — |
| LMArena French | 1481 | — |
| LMArena German | 1472 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1440 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1432 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1466 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 69.0 (#178)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1308 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 39.5 (#177)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1483 | 1299 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1: 52.2 (#175)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.8 | Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1320 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1454 | 1314 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1476 | 1317 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1840 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1281 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1?
Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 36.7 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 better for coding?
Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 38.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 share?
10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253b v1 has 11.