The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) leads the LLM Stats Score 22.1 to 4.9.

Meta · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) leads the overall LLM Stats Score 22.1 to 4.9, ranking #202 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.35/M input and $0.40/M output

Choose Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

  • overall performance matters — it scores 22.1 and ranks #202 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Meta
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
4.9
#321
22.1
#202
Reasoning
6.4
#309
19.8
#213
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 1
1 of 1
Input price
$0.35 / M
— / M
Output price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Context window
128,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Math
11.5#250
12.2#245
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

13 reported for Llama 3.2 90B Instruct · 10 for Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

1 shared

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

86.0B diff

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct has 86.0B more parameters than Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B), making it 2150.0% larger.

Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
90.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
4.0Bparameters
90.0B
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
4.0B
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Llama 3.2 90B Instruct specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only Llama 3.2 90B Instruct specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Meta
Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) does not.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is licensed under Llama 3.2, while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) uses OpenMDW License v1.1.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Llama 3.2

Open weights

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct was released on 2024-09-25, while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) was released on 2026-10-16.

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is 25 months newer than Llama 3.2 90B Instruct.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct

Sep 25, 2024

2.1 years ago

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Oct 16, 2026

1 days ago

2.1yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Llama 3.2 90B Instruct and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct
✓ Preferred
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Llama 3.2 90B Instruct vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B).

Which is better, Llama 3.2 90B Instruct or Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) leads the LLM Stats Score 22.1 to 4.9. Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is made by Meta and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Llama 3.2 90B Instruct compare to Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) in benchmarks?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct scores AI2D: 92.3%, DocVQA: 90.1%, MGSM: 86.9%, MMLU: 86.0%, ChartQA: 85.5%. Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) scores IFBench: 77.9%, GPQA: 72.4%, AA-LCR: 71.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 59.5%, SciCode: 34.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Llama 3.2 90B Instruct and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct supports 128K tokens and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) supports an unknown number of tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Llama 3.2 90B Instruct and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (4.9 vs 22.1), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Llama 3.2 vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Llama 3.2 90B Instruct and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Llama 3.2 90B Instruct is developed by Meta and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons