Head-to-head comparison across 3benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GLM-5
67
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
48
Verified leaderboard positions: GLM-5 #24 · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B unranked
Pick GLM-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.
Coding
+9.7 difference
Knowledge
+4.8 difference
Inst. Following
+18.4 difference
GLM-5
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
$1 / $3.2
$0 / $0
74 t/s
N/A
1.64s
N/A
200K
256K
Pick GLM-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.
GLM-5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 67 to 48. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GLM-5's sharpest advantage is in instruction following, where it averages 92.6 against 74.2. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 86% 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.
GLM-5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.00 input / $3.20 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 GLM-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 GLM-5.
GLM-5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 67 to 48. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 86% and 72.2%.
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.5 versus 70.7. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 63.2 versus 53.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GLM-5 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 92.6 versus 74.2. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.