NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 vs xAI Grok-2
Detailed comparison for LLMs
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 is the more secure of the two: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 scores 40.0% and Grok-2 scores 46.0% 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
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 is the overall winner in this comparison!
Attack Success Rate (lower is safer)
ASR for NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 vs xAI Grok-2. 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
- NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 has a lower Overall (ASR).
Security Profile
Outward is better on every axis.
Frequently asked questions
Is NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 or xAI Grok-2 more secure?
On Guardion's LLM vulnerability Benchmark, NVIDIA Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 is the more secure of the two: Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 scores 40.0% and Grok-2 scores 46.0% 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 vs Grok-2?
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 has a 40.0% ASR and Grok-2 has a 46.0% ASR — the share of adversarial prompts that succeed across zero-shot, TAP, and Crescendo attacks. Lower is safer.
How were Llama 3.1 Nemotron Ultra 253B v1 and Grok-2 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.