Model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 5 #1 (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 5 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 13 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 66 results are unique to Claude Opus 5; 16 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- Claude Opus 5 only
- 66
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 16
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Claude Opus 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 5 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 5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 85.88 to 43.35. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Opus 5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 89.5 against 32. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Opus 5 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 Nano Omni 30B A3B. 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 | Claude Opus 5 | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude Opus 589.5 | Margin← 57.5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | Claude Opus 564.7 | Margin→ 11.6 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Multimodal | Claude Opus 566.9 | Margin→ 9.4 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Agentic | Claude Opus 590.8 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Reasoning | Claude Opus 590.4 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Inst. Following | Claude Opus 5Not 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 5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Opus 5$5 input / $25 output | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Opus 5Not available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Opus 5Not available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Opus 5Not available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | A complete context comparison is not available. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic26 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierBench v0.1Source | 43.3% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 90.8% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | 64.7% | — | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | 95.0% | — | Not comparable |
| DRACOSource | 88.6% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseComp (10-agent, prerelease)Source | 93.6% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 85.8% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP-Atlas claim coverageSource | 89.1% | — | Not comparable |
| LAB all-pass (Anthropic harness)Source | 23.58% | — | Not comparable |
| LAB criterion-pass (Anthropic harness)Source | 93.74% | — | Not comparable |
| LAB all-pass (Harvey held-out)Source | 11.7% | — | Not comparable |
| LAB criterion-pass (Harvey held-out)Source | 94.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 1861 | 465 | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| Toolathlon-VerifiedSource | 80.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified Pass@3Source | 87.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified Pass³Source | 73.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Toolathlon Verified avg. turnsSource | 23.5 turns | — | Not comparable |
| AutomationBenchSource | 26.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | 55.3% | — | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | 68.0% | 0.0% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | 30.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | 1720 | — | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | 89.1% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | — | 47.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Opus 5 wins13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 96% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 79.2% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultilingualSource | 89.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE MultimodalSource | 59.4% | — | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | 68.8% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | 53.4% | — | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | 63.6% | — | Not comparable |
| ProgramBench (episode 1)Source | 83.0% | — | Not comparable |
| ProgramBenchSource | 93.0% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 70.0% | — | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 78.0% | 13.8% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 55.7% | 27.8% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| SciCodeSource | — | 32% | Not comparable |
Reasoning5 benchmarks
KnowledgeNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins24 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| HLESource | 64.7% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 56.3% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench (raw)Source | 67.1% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench (length-adjusted)Source | 57.8% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | 59.8% | — | Not comparable |
| HealthBench Professional (raw)Source | 73.4% | — | Not comparable |
| BioMysteryBench (human-solvable)Source | 90.1% | — | Not comparable |
| BioMysteryBench (human-difficult)Source | 49.4% | — | Not comparable |
| SpatialBench VerifiedSource | 72.5% | — | Not comparable |
| SingleCellBenchSource | 60.6% | — | Not comparable |
| ProteinGym HardSource | 47.7% | — | Not comparable |
| Protein DesignSource | 42.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Organic chemistry V2Source | 61.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Protocols (troubleshooting)Source | 61.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Protocols (understanding)Source | 78.4% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 60.7% | 14.9% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 93.2% | 46.9% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 52.6% | 5.3% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 31.3% | -56.0% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 54.2% | 14.8% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 50.1% | 83.1% | Claude Opus 5 leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IMO 2026Source | 42/42 | — | Not comparable |
| RiemannBench (no tools)Source | 60.0% | — | Not comparable |
| RiemannBench (tools)Source | 79.0% | — | Not comparable |
| ArXivMath Jun. 2026 (no tools)Source | 90.8% | — | Not comparable |
| ArXivMath Jun. 2026 (tools)Source | 91.3% | — | Not comparable |
| AIME 2025Source | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
Multilingual3 benchmarks
MultimodalNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins16 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chartography (no tools)Source | 29.6% | — | Not comparable |
| Chartography (tools)Source | 83.0% | — | Not comparable |
| BenchCAD Vision2Code (no tools)Source | 0.366 | — | Not comparable |
| BenchCAD Vision2Code (tools)Source | 0.821 | — | Not comparable |
| GDP.pdf (no tools)Source | 83.4% | — | Not comparable |
| GDP.pdf (tools)Source | 85.5% | — | Not comparable |
| OfficeQASource | 78.1% | — | Not comparable |
| OfficeQA ProSource | 66.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | 84.7% | 53.2% | Claude Opus 5 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 (4)
Which is better, Claude Opus 5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Claude Opus 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 85.88 to 43.35.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.3 versus 64.7. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Claude Opus 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.5 versus 32. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.3 versus 66.9. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.