Back to LLM Benchmark & Hardware Sizing Engine
Alibaba CloudvsNVIDIA

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct vs Llama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2

Side-by-side technical showdown between Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct and Llama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2 on TheModelverse. Compare verified LLM benchmark scores, quantization compression, local GPU hardware sizing, and API inference pricing.

Executive Showdown & Winner Breakdown

Who Wins Where: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct vs Llama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2

Verified across benchmarks, pricing & local VRAM footprint
VRAM Efficiency (INT4)
150 GB lighter
Leader:Llama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2(150.3 GB vs 0.6 GB)

Llama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2 requires substantially less memory to run at scale, fitting on more accessible GPU tiers.

Hardware Sizing & Model Compression

LLM Hardware Sizing & Quantization Sizing

Simulate weight compression levels and dynamic KV-cache expansion to verify whether these models fit on your local hardware or cloud GPU cluster.

Quantization Level
Active Precision
4 bits / parameter
VRAM Reduction
-72.5% vs FP16
Benchmark Retention
96–98% (Sweet Spot)
Context Simulator
Total VRAM Footprint @ 8k Context (INT4 (GGUF / AWQ))
Model 1Open Weights

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

150.3GB
Weights: ~129.3 GBKV Cache: ~1.4 GB+15% CUDA Buffer
Total Params:
235B
Active Compute:
Dense
Attention Scheme:
GQA (Grouped-Query)
Max Context:
131k tokens
Target Hardware: 4x–8x H100 Cluster with Tensor Parallelism (TP=4)
Model 2Open Weights

Llama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2

0.6GB
Weights: ~0.6 GBKV Cache: ~0 GB+15% CUDA Buffer
Total Params:
~1B
Active Compute:
Dense
Attention Scheme:
GQA (Grouped-Query)
Max Context:
8k tokens
Target Hardware: 1x RTX 4070 / 4080 (16GB) or Mac (16GB Unified)
GPU & Hardware Tier Compatibility Matrix
Hardware ConfigurationAvailable VRAMQwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLlama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2
16 GB VRAM
RTX 4070 / 4080 (16GB), Mac M-Series (16GB)
16 GB✕ OOM Optimal
24 GB VRAM
1x RTX 3090 / 4090 (24GB), Mac M-Series (32GB)
24 GB✕ OOM Optimal
48 GB VRAM
2x RTX 4090 (TP=2), 1x L40S, Mac M-Series (64GB)
48 GB✕ OOM Optimal
80 GB VRAM
1x NVIDIA A100 / H100 (80GB), Mac Studio (128GB)
80 GB✕ OOM Optimal
160 GB Node
2x H100 (TP=2), 4x L40S, Mac Studio (192GB)
160 GB Tight (Low Ctx) Optimal
Multi-Node Cluster
4x–8x H100 Datacenter Cluster
320 GB Optimal Optimal
Inference Economics & Cost Simulator

Token Pricing & Scale Economics

Calculate estimated monthly cloud API spend and evaluate the breakeven point vs self-hosted GPU hardware.

10k500k1M
Pricing MetricQwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLlama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2
Input Cost (/1M tokens)Free / OpenFree / Open
Cached Input (/1M tokens)
Output Cost (/1M tokens)Free / OpenFree / Open
Simulated Monthly Bill (100,000 calls)
$0 API Cost
Open Weights
$0 API Cost
Open Weights
Self-Hosted Breakeven vs $864/mo GPUSelf-Hostable Day 1Self-Hostable Day 1

Architecture Matrix

FeatureQwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructLlama Nemotron Rerank VL 1B v2
Release Date9/23/20253/31/2026
Routing / MoEDenseDense
Attention MechanismStandard / GQAStandard / GQA
Source TypeOpen Weights (Open)Open Weights (Open)
Customize or Add a 3rd Model to this Showdown