Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

64.3/100
Margin
21.0pts
← winning
2 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Sonnet 4.6 #35 (Supported); 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 4.6 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 15 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Claude Sonnet 4.6; 14 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
15
Claude Sonnet 4.6 only
18
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
14
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 15 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 Sonnet 4.6 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 64.3 to 43.32. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Sonnet 4.6's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 69.1 against 32. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 89.9% to 72.2%. 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 Sonnet 4.6 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 4.6 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 4.6.

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 Sonnet 4.6 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
CategoryClaude Sonnet 4.6ΔNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.669.1Margin 37.1Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0
KnowledgeClaude Sonnet 4.666.0Margin 10.3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 4.677.4Margin 1.1Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3
AgenticClaude Sonnet 4.665.2MarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured
MathClaude Sonnet 4.626.4MarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured
Inst. FollowingClaude Sonnet 4.6Not measuredMarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude Sonnet 4.6B · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 89.9%B 72.2%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 17.7
    GPQA: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 89.9%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 72.2%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.
  2. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 79.2%B 77.3%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 1.9
    MMLU-Pro: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 79.2%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 77.3%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.
  3. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 77.4%B 76.3%
    Winner: Claude Sonnet 4.6Δ 1.2
    CharXiv: Claude Sonnet 4.6 scored 77.4%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 76.3%. Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6$3 input / $15 outputNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 outputNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Sonnet 4.644 tok/sNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Sonnet 4.61.48 sNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Sonnet 4.6200KNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256KNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59.1%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 72.1%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 67.8%Not comparable
CyberGymSource 65.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 79.5%45.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Gert LabsSource 62.92%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 8.3%Not comparable
JobBenchSource 36.9%Not comparable
OSWorldSource 47.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 465Not comparable
CodingClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79.6%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource 60.7%Not comparable
React Native EvalsSource 80.6%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 51.48%Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 48.8%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 46.9%27.8%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 24.3%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 32%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 13.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
AA-LCRSource 57.7%35.7%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
CritPtSource 0.9%0.0%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
KnowledgeNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
GPQASource 89.9%72.2%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
SuperGPQASource 95%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 79.2%77.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
HLESource 49%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 35.9%14.9%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 79.9%46.9%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-HLESource 13.2%5.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -2.9%-56.0%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 38.0%14.8%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 65.9%83.1%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
GPQA-DSource 72.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 32.400%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 8.300%Not comparable
AIME 2025Source 82.1%Not comparable
MultimodalClaude Sonnet 4.6 wins
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
CharXivSource 77.4%76.3%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 70.6%53.2%Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1310Not comparable
MMMUSource 70.8%Not comparable
MMLongBench-DocSource 57.5%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
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Sonnet 4.6Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 41.2%63.2%Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads
IFBenchSource 74.2%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 64.3 to 43.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 89.9% and 72.2%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 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 66. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 69.1 versus 32. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Claude Sonnet 4.6 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 77.4 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 27, 2026

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.