Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.5 #98 (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 Sonnet 4.5 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 10 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.5; 27 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 2
- Claude Sonnet 4.5 only
- 10
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 27
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 256K context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 52.82 to 43.32. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 4.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 77.2 against 32. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 83.4% to 72.2%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 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. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Claude Sonnet 4.5 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 200K for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
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 Sonnet 4.5 | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Claude Sonnet 4.577.2 | Margin← 45.2 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | Claude Sonnet 4.583.4 | Margin← 7.1 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Agentic | Claude Sonnet 4.555.4 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Reasoning | Claude Sonnet 4.513.6 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Math | Claude Sonnet 4.511.2 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Sonnet 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | Claude Sonnet 4.5Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 83.4%B 72.2%Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.5Δ 11.2GPQA: Claude Sonnet 4.5 scored 83.4%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 72.2%. Claude Sonnet 4.5 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.5$3 input / $15 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 Sonnet 4.5Not available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Sonnet 4.5Not available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Sonnet 4.5200K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 50% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 61.4% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 17.0% | — | Not comparable |
| Gert LabsSource | 48.51% | — | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | 27.7% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | — | 47.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 45.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 465 | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.5 wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.5 wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83.4% | 72.2% | Claude Sonnet 4.5 leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 14.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 46.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 5.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -56.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 14.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 83.1% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1215 | — | 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 |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 52.82 to 43.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 83.4% and 72.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.4 versus 76.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 32. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
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.