Google Gemini 2.5 Pro vs NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is the more secure of the two: Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 16.1% and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 scores 40.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
Head-to-Head Overview
Gemini 2.5 Pro is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for Google Gemini 2.5 Pro vs NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1. Green marks the safer model on each metric. Only the overall score is available for estimated models.
Overall (ASR)
TAP Attack Method (ASR)
Crescendo Attack Method (ASR)
Zero-Shot (ASR)
Key Highlights
- Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Overall (ASR).
- Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower TAP Attack Method (ASR).
- Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Crescendo Attack Method (ASR).
- Google Gemini 2.5 Pro has a lower Zero-Shot (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is Google Gemini 2.5 Pro or NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro is the more secure of the two: Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 16.1% and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 scores 40.0% on attack success rate (ASR) (lower is better). One or both scores are estimated from public safety evaluations pending a Guardion benchmark run.
What is the attack success rate (ASR) of Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1?
Gemini 2.5 Pro has a 16.1% ASR and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 has a 40.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Gemini 2.5 Pro and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 tested?
Both were red-teamed with the HarmBench framework across zero-shot, TAP (Tree of Attacks with Pruning), and Crescendo multi-turn attacks, scored by Attack Success Rate.