Model comparison
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 9 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking #193 (Supported); Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B #159 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 9 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking; 20 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 9
- Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking only
- 0
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 20
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 9 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | Claude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Multimodal | Claude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | Claude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus ThinkingNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking29 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking15.00 s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking200K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 33.7% | 14.9% | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 80.9% | 46.9% | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads |
| AA-HLESource | 11.9% | 5.3% | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -56.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 14.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 83.1% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 67.9% | 53.2% | Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking leads |
| MMMUSource | — | 70.8% | Not comparable |
| MMLongBench-DocSource | — | 57.5% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 76.3% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| AI2D_TESTSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 90.5% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B today?
Claude 4.1 Opus Thinking: Pricing unavailable Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.