Skip to main content
BenchLM

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Updated September 24, 2026. Rank says Claude Haiku 4.5 is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Decision reading

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the higher public score, 42.48 versus 19.1, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. 1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
Anthropic logo

Anthropic

42.48/100

Estimated · Public rank #105

90% interval 30.9–54.1

Model B
NVIDIA logo

NVIDIA

19.1/100

Estimated · Public rank #186

90% interval 9.2–29.0

Shared results
1
Claude Haiku 4.5 only
9
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
12
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8
Estimated: Claude Haiku 4.5 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4How the comparison works

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited
  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited
  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude Haiku 4.5 does not fit this workload in one request. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates
  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

19.8Claude Haiku 4.511.4Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Directional only · BenchAlign v5.7

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher, but at least one score rests on Estimated evidence or a different benchmark set. Directional only, no winner.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Same basis rules as the category table below

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

3 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.7 lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Directional only
Claude Haiku 4.5
21.7
Supported · #85/105
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
7.3
Estimated · #104/105
Basis
BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 2 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Directional only
Claude Haiku 4.5
19.8
Supported · #117/135
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
11.4
Estimated · #135/135
Basis
BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Claude Haiku 4.5
34.5
Estimated · #111/158
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
20.7
Estimated · #154/158
Basis
BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 2 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
55.9
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
68.5
#67/124
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
28.8
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.7) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Claude Haiku 4.5
$0.0035
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Claude Haiku 4.5
$0.065
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Claude Haiku 4.5
$0.09
Does not fit in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Claude Haiku 4.5 does not fit this workload in one request. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

API model ID

Claude Haiku 4.5

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001

Claude API pricing

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Documented inputs

Claude Haiku 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Claude Haiku 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Provider availability

Claude Haiku 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Claude Haiku 4.5

Non-Reasoning

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Reasoning

Weight access

Claude Haiku 4.5

Proprietary

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Open Weight

License

Claude Haiku 4.5

Proprietary

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Open Weight

Release date

Claude Haiku 4.5

2025-10-15

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

2026-08-11

If you already use one of these models

Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
Claude Haiku 4.5 has the higher public score, 42.48 versus 19.1, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4?

Claude Haiku 4.5 has the higher public score, 42.48 versus 19.1, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4?

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher for coding on the public lane, 19.8 to 11.4. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 is scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4?

Claude Haiku 4.5 scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 21.7 to 7.3. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 200K.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence22 rows

Agentic

  • JobBench

    Claude Haiku 4.516.0%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    Claude Haiku 4.543.8%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PinchBench

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP483.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP49.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Claude Haiku 4.573.3%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP452.8%
    Source

    Claude Haiku 4.5 leads this result

  • VulcanBench v3

    Claude Haiku 4.576.2%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    Claude Haiku 4.541.2%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    Claude Haiku 4.566.6%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP431.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    Claude Haiku 4.572.2%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    Claude Haiku 4.578.7%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP410.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP481.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP472.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Claude Haiku 4.55.903%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Claude Haiku 4.52.083%
    Source
    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—

    Not directly comparable

22 public results · 1 shared

Watch Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

Last updated September 24, 2026