Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.
1-bit Bonsai 1.7B
~39
Winner · 0/8 categoriesNova Pro
34
4/8 categories1-bit Bonsai 1.7B· Nova Pro
Pick 1-bit Bonsai 1.7B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nova Pro only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 128K context window.
1-bit Bonsai 1.7B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 39 to 34. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Nova Pro gives you the larger context window at 128K, compared with 32K for 1-bit Bonsai 1.7B.
BenchLM keeps the benchmark table and the operator tradeoffs on the same page so a better score does not hide a materially slower, pricier, or smaller-context model.
Runtime metrics show N/A when BenchLM does not have a sourced snapshot for that exact model. The scoring rules and freshness policy are documented on the methodology page.
| Benchmark | 1-bit Bonsai 1.7B | Nova Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Agentic | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 | — | 31% |
| BrowseComp | — | 39% |
| OSWorld-Verified | — | 32% |
| Coding | ||
| HumanEval | — | 33% |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 19% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 14% |
| SWE-bench Pro | — | 20% |
| Multimodal & Grounded | ||
| MMMU-Pro | — | 37% |
| OfficeQA Pro | — | 46% |
| ReasoningNova Pro wins | ||
| MuSR | 45.1% | 37% |
| LongBench v2 | — | 51% |
| KnowledgeNova Pro wins | ||
| GPQA | 20.7% | 40% |
| MMLU | — | 41% |
| SuperGPQA | — | 38% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53% |
| FrontierScience | — | 41% |
| SimpleQA | — | 39% |
| Instruction FollowingNova Pro wins | ||
| IFEval | 63% | 66% |
| Multilingual | ||
| MGSM | — | 61% |
| MMLU-ProX | — | 60% |
| MathematicsNova Pro wins | ||
| MATH-500 | 34.4% | 59% |
| AIME 2023 | — | 41% |
| AIME 2024 | — | 43% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 42% |
| HMMT Feb 2023 | — | 37% |
| HMMT Feb 2024 | — | 39% |
| HMMT Feb 2025 | — | 38% |
| BRUMO 2025 | — | 40% |
1-bit Bonsai 1.7B is ahead overall, 39 to 34. The biggest single separator in this matchup is MATH-500, where the scores are 34.4% and 59%.
Nova Pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 43.5 versus 20.7. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Nova Pro has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 45.6 versus 34.4. Inside this category, MATH-500 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Nova Pro has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 45.4 versus 45.1. Inside this category, MuSR is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Nova Pro has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 66 versus 63. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.