Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 29 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

77.8/100
Margin
17.8pts
← winning
60/100
3 category wins0 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.8 #1; Nemotron 3 Ultra #24

BenchAlign evidence: Claude Opus 4.8 supported; Nemotron 3 Ultra not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.8 and Nemotron 3 Ultra share 29 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 24 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.8; 10 to Nemotron 3 Ultra.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
29
Claude Opus 4.8 only
24
Nemotron 3 Ultra only
10
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Ultra only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 29 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.8 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 84 to 60. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.8's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 80.3 against 51.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is BrowseComp, 84.3% to 44.4%.

Claude Opus 4.8 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $5.00 input / $25.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Nemotron 3 Ultra. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone.

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 scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.8 and Nemotron 3 Ultra
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8ΔNemotron 3 Ultra
AgenticClaude Opus 4.880.3Margin← 29.0Nemotron 3 Ultra51.3
CodingClaude Opus 4.881.1Margin← 22.8Nemotron 3 Ultra58.3
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.862.7Margin← 8.5Nemotron 3 Ultra54.2
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.8Not measuredMarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Ultra61.9
MathClaude Opus 4.853.9MarginNo overlapNemotron 3 UltraNot measured
MultilingualClaude Opus 4.8Not measuredMarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Ultra83.0
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.877.0MarginNo overlapNemotron 3 UltraNot measured
Inst. FollowingClaude Opus 4.8Not measuredMarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Ultra81.7

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.8B · Nemotron 3 Ultra

  1. BrowseComp

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 84.3%B 44.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 39.9
    BrowseComp: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 84.3%; Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 44.4%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 57.9%B 26.7%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 31.2
    HLE: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 57.9%; Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 26.7%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  3. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 74.6%B 56.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 18.2
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 74.6%; Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 56.4%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 88.6%B 71.9%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 16.7
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 88.6%; Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 71.9%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  5. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 93.6%B 87%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 6.6
    GPQA: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 93.6%; Nemotron 3 Ultra scored 87%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.8$5 input / $25 outputNemotron 3 Ultra$0 input / $0 outputNemotron 3 Ultra has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.8Not availableNemotron 3 UltraNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.8Not availableNemotron 3 UltraNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.81MNemotron 3 Ultra1MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%56.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
BrowseCompSource 84.3%44.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
DeepSearchQASource 93.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83.4%—Not comparable
Finance Agent v2Source 53.9%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 16001164Claude Opus 4.8 leads
MCP AtlasSource 82.2%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 59.9%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 72.97%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 47.2%27.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 94.4%83.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
GDPval-AASource 55.0%33.2%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 21.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 20.6%—Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1354870Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA AutomationBenchSource 48.5%—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 44.0%28.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA Harvey LABSource 7.5%3.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA Tau3 BankingSource 27.6%—Not comparable
PinchBenchSource —90.0%Not comparable
τ³-bench resultsSource —70.9%Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource —37.4%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 88.6%71.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 69.2%—Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 84.4%67.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
SWE MultimodalSource 38.4%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%56.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
cursorBench31Source 58.4%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 62.3%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 74.3%49.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Terminal-Bench HardSource 58.3%36.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.5%39.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
FrontierCodeSource 46.5%—Not comparable
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source 84.6%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v6Source —89.0%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —44.6%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
AA-LCRSource 67.7%67.0%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CritPtSource 20.9%3.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
LongBench v2Source —61.9%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
GPQASource 93.6%87%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
GPQA-DSource 93.6%87.0%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HLESource 57.9%26.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 49.8%26.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 55.7%37.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%86.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-HLESource 45.7%26.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 27.4%-0.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.6%21.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 35.9%28.5%Nemotron 3 Ultra leads
MMLU-ProSource —86.8%Not comparable
AA Openness IndexSource —83.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
USAMO 2026Source 96.7%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.241%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 31.250%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
INCLUDESource 87.6%—Not comparable
MMLU-ProXSource —83%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
OfficeQA ProSource 66.2%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 87.9%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 89.9%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 80.5%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12741132Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 UltraResult
AA-IFBenchSource 62.2%81.4%Nemotron 3 Ultra leads
IFBenchSource —81.7%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Claude Opus 4.8 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 84 to 60. The biggest single separator in this matchup is BrowseComp, where the scores are 84.3% and 44.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.7 versus 54.2. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.8 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 81.1 versus 58.3. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.3 versus 51.3. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.