Verdict
Built from the measurements below
- Accuracy is too close to call: Llama 4 Scout scored 41.2% and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 40.0% on the same 80 questions, a gap within what chance alone could produce.
- Llama 4 Scout is 3.4× cheaper per question as billed ($0.00037 vs $0.0013), reasoning tokens included.
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL generates text 47× faster: 715 tokens per second against 15.
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL starts answering sooner: 0.6 s to the first token, against 1.2 s for Llama 4 Scout.
- Llama 4 Scout accepts more context: 1.3M tokens against 1M.
Which should you choose?
Choose Llama 4 Scout for the lower cost per correct answer ($0.0009 against $0.0032), shorter outputs (about 723 tokens per question against 2,771) and a 1.3M-token context window. Choose Nemotron 3.5 Super VL for faster streaming, a quicker first token and more hosts to choose from on OpenRouter (9 against 2). The widest subject gap is in medicine: Llama 4 Scout answered 6 of 11 correctly, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 2 of 11. With so few questions per subject, treat this as a lead to test on your own prompts, not a result.
Accuracy gap +1.2 points (z = 0.16). We call a winner only when z is at least 1.96, the usual 95% threshold. Speed, latency and price need a 10% margin.