Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Anthropic
Anthropic
vs
Nvidia
Nvidia

Claude Opus 4.6 vs Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

108 out of our 483 tracked models have had a price change in March.

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Key Takeaways

Claude Opus 4.6 wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Supports vision

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
Price Advantage
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
Benchmark Advantage
Claude Opus 4.6
Context Window
Claude Opus 4.6
Speed
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5

Pricing Comparison

Price Comparison

MetricClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5Winner
Input (per 1M tokens)$5.00$0.10 Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
Output (per 1M tokens)$25.00$0.40 Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
Cache Read (per 1M)$0.50N/A Claude Opus 4.6
Cache Write (per 1M)$6.25N/A Claude Opus 4.6
Using a 3:1 input/output ratio, Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 is 98% cheaper overall.

Claude Opus 4.6 Providers

No provider data available

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 Providers

No provider data available

Benchmark Comparison

7
Benchmarks Compared
3
Claude Opus 4.6 Wins
0
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 Wins

Benchmark Scores

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5Winner
Intelligence Index
Overall intelligence score
46.514.6
Coding Index
Code generation & understanding
47.610.5
Math Index
Mathematical reasoning
-8.0-
MMLU Pro
Academic knowledge
-69.2-
GPQA
Graduate-level science
84.048.1
LiveCodeBench
Competitive programming
-29.0-
AIME
Competition math
-13.7-
Claude Opus 4.6 significantly outperforms in coding benchmarks.

Cost vs Quality

X-axis:
Y-axis:
Loading chart...
Other models

Context & Performance

Context Window

Claude Opus 4.6
1,000,000
tokens
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
131,072
tokens
Claude Opus 4.6 has a 87% larger context window.

Speed Performance

MetricClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5Winner
Tokens/second48.1 tok/s82.7 tok/s
Time to First Token1.68s0.24s
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 responds 72% faster on average.

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyClaude Opus 4.6Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
AuthorAnthropicNvidia
ReleasedFeb 2026Oct 2025

Claude Opus 4.6 Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Claude Opus 4.6 with:

Compare Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 has cheaper input pricing at $0.10/M tokens. Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 has cheaper output pricing at $0.40/M tokens.
Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 47.6, compared to Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5's score of 10.5.
Claude Opus 4.6 has a 1,000,000 token context window, while Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 has a 131,072 token context window.
Claude Opus 4.6 supports vision. Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 does not support vision.