Coding
Like-for-like- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- 43.6
- Supported · #121/183
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 26.9
- Supported · #174/183
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 4 vs 7 public rows
- Reading
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Nemotron 3 Ultra
Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.
Decision reading
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the higher public score estimate, 60.5 versus 40.69, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.
7 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
Share or export
Which one for your work
Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads on the public coding lane, 43.6 to 26.9, with Supported evidence for both models and non-overlapping 90% intervals.
Confidence: stronger
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limited
Long documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documented
Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
Repository review cost
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
Not enough matched evidence
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Confidence: listed-rates
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
3 Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
7 Shared
17 Nemotron 3 Ultra only
- Shared results
- 7
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite only
- 3
- Nemotron 3 Ultra only
- 17
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 / 8
2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.
Agentic
Directional only- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- 43.4
- Estimated · #104/151
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 22.3
- Supported · #150/151
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 3 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Knowledge
Directional only- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- 53.0
- Supported · #71/181
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 45.7
- Estimated · #114/181
- Basis
- BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 7 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Reasoning
Not comparable- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- 60.8
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 48.7
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- Not ranked
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- Not ranked
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 47.4
- #7/12
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- 76.1
- #16/48
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- Not ranked
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- 88.7
- #28/120
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 43.6Supported · #121/183 | 26.9Supported · #174/183 | Like-for-likeBenchAlign lane · 4 vs 7 public rows | Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads |
| Agentic | 43.4Estimated · #104/151 | 22.3Supported · #150/151 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 3 vs 6 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 53.0Supported · #71/181 | 45.7Estimated · #114/181 | Directional onlyBenchAlign lane · 2 vs 7 public rows | Directional only |
| Reasoning | 60.8Unranked · 3 rankable rows | 48.7Unranked · 1 rankable row | Not comparableProvisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | 47.4#7/12 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | 76.1#16/48 | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not ranked | 88.7#28/120 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Shape of the matched evidence
Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Coding
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: 79.0%Nemotron 3 Ultra: 86.0%Normalized gap 7.0Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite source Nemotron 3 Ultra sourceTerminal-Bench 2.0
Agentic
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: 54%Nemotron 3 Ultra: 56.4%Normalized gap 2.4Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite source Nemotron 3 Ultra source
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.
Chat turn
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- $0.00155
- Fits in one request
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Ultra has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- $0.0225
- Fits in one request
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Ultra has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
- $0.037
- Fits in one request
- Nemotron 3 Ultra
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Nemotron 3 Ultra has no comparable published API token rate.
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteNemotron 3 Ultra
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Nemotron 3 Ultra
1M
API model ID
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
gemini-3.5-flash-lite
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite model documentationNemotron 3 Ultra
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
$0.03 per 1M cached input tokens
Google Gemini API pricingNemotron 3 Ultra
No comparable hosted API rate
Documented inputs
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
text, image, video, audio, pdf
Google Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite model documentationNemotron 3 Ultra
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Not sourced
Provider availability
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Generally Available · Gemini API, Google AI Studio
Google latest Gemini model guideNemotron 3 Ultra
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Reasoning
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Reasoning
Weight access
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Proprietary
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Open Weight
License
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Proprietary
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Open Weight
Release date
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
2026-07-21
Nemotron 3 Ultra
2026-06-04
If you already use one of these models
- Deployment change
- The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
- Quality signal
- Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the higher public score estimate, 60.5 versus 40.69, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
- Workload cost
- A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
- Context tradeoff
- Both models list 1M.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence27 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra56.4%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra leads this result
OSWorld-Verified
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite74%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite50.2%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra50.9%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra leads this result
PinchBench
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra90.0%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra44.4%SourceNot directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra70.9%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE w/ tools
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra37.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.0%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra56.4%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra leads this result
SWE-bench Pro
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite54.2%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra—Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench (Vals)
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite79.0%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra86.0%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra leads this result
SWE-bench (Vals)
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite75.0%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra69.0%SourceGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads this result
SWE-bench Verified
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra71.9%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE Multilingual
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra67.7%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra89.0%SourceNot directly comparable
SciCode
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra44.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Knowledge
GPQA Diamond (Vals)
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite83.8%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra86.1%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra leads this result
MMLU-Pro (Vals)
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite85.8%SourceNemotron 3 Ultra85.8%SourceTie
GPQA
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra87%SourceNot directly comparable
GPQA-D
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra87.0%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra26.7%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra26.7%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra86.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Multilingual
MMLU-ProX
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra83%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
IFBench
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite—Nemotron 3 Ultra81.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite has the higher public score estimate, 60.5 versus 40.69, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads the public coding lane, 43.6 to 26.9, with Supported evidence for both models and non-overlapping 90% intervals.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 43.4 to 22.3. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which costs less, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.
Which has the larger context window, Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Both models list the same context window, 1M.
Related comparisons
Last updated September 4, 2026
Watch Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite vs Nemotron 3 Ultra
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.