Model comparison
Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 12 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking #77 (Estimated); 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 Opus 4.5 Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 12 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking; 17 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 12
- Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking only
- 4
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 17
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 12 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 Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5 Thinking | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5 Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 4.5 ThinkingNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking200K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.8% | 14.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 86.6% | 46.9% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-HLESource | 28.4% | 5.3% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 13.3% | -56.0% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 45.7% | 14.8% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 59.8% | 83.1% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| AA MMLU-ProSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Global-MMLU-LiteSource | 91.3% | — | Not comparable |
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 74.0% | 53.2% | Claude Opus 4.5 Thinking leads |
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1272 | — | Not comparable |
| 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 Opus 4.5 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 Opus 4.5 Thinking and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B today?
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.