Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Deepseek
Deepseek
vs
Nvidia
Nvidia

DeepSeek V3.1 vs Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

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

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

DeepSeek V3.1 wins:

  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Better at math

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
Price Advantage
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
Benchmark Advantage
DeepSeek V3.1
Context Window
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
Speed
Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureDeepSeek V3.1Llama 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

PropertyDeepSeek V3.1Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5
LicenseOpen SourceProprietary
AuthorDeepseekNvidia
ReleasedAug 2025Oct 2025

DeepSeek V3.1 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

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.
DeepSeek V3.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 28.4, compared to Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5's score of 10.5.
DeepSeek V3.1 has a 32,768 token context window, while Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 has a 131,072 token context window.
DeepSeek V3.1 does not support vision. Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49B V1.5 does not support vision.