Model comparison
DeepSeek V3.2 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V3.2 #88 (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. DeepSeek V3.2 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 11 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to DeepSeek V3.2; 18 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- DeepSeek V3.2 only
- 8
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 18
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick DeepSeek V3.2 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 11 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
DeepSeek V3.2 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 54.5 to 43.32. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
DeepSeek V3.2's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 60.9 against 32.
DeepSeek V3.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.28 input / $0.42 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 DeepSeek V3.2 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 128K for DeepSeek V3.2.
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 | DeepSeek V3.2 | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | DeepSeek V3.260.9 | Margin← 28.9 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | DeepSeek V3.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Math | DeepSeek V3.217.1 | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured |
| Multimodal | DeepSeek V3.2Not measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | DeepSeek V3.2Not 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 | DeepSeek V3.2 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | DeepSeek V3.2$0.28 input / $0.42 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 | DeepSeek V3.235 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | DeepSeek V3.23.75 s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | DeepSeek V3.2128K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.2 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 40.2% | — | Not comparable |
| VITA-BenchSource | 18.5% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 78.9% | 45.3% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 29.57% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | — | 47.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 465 | Not comparable |
CodingDeepSeek V3.2 wins5 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.2 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 24.7% | 14.9% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 75.1% | 46.9% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 10.5% | 5.3% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -46.7% | -56.0% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 24.2% | 14.8% | DeepSeek V3.2 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 93.5% | 83.1% | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math3 benchmarks
Multimodal9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | DeepSeek V3.2 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | 1200 | — | 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 (2)
Which is better, DeepSeek V3.2 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
DeepSeek V3.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 54.5 to 43.32.
Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V3.2 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
DeepSeek V3.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.9 versus 32. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.