Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Grok 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

Updated October 7, 2026. Rank says Grok 4.5 is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVAPI/MCP

Decision reading

Grok 4.5 has the higher public point estimate, 63.97 versus 46.68. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 8 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
xAI logo

xAI

63.97/100

Supported · Public rank #39

90% interval 59.2–68.8

Model B
NVIDIA logo

NVIDIA

46.68/100

Estimated · Public rank #105

Conditional range 32.3–61.0

Shared results
8
Grok 4.5 only
9
Nemotron 3 Ultra only
16
Like-for-like categories
2 / 8
Supported: Grok 4.5 · Estimated: Nemotron 3 Ultra. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works

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

    Grok 4.5

    Grok 4.5 has the higher public coding point estimate, 57.7 to 23.4, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

    Confidence: limited
  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Grok 4.5

    Grok 4.5 has the higher public agentic point estimate, 57.6 to 26.9, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

    Confidence: limited
  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Nemotron 3 Ultra

    Nemotron 3 Ultra has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented
Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • 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

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

57.7Grok 4.523.4Nemotron 3 Ultra

Like-for-like · BenchAlign v5.8

Grok 4.5 has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Same basis rules as the category table below

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

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.

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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

Like-for-like
Grok 4.5
57.6
Supported · #29/122
Nemotron 3 Ultra
26.9
Supported · #93/122
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Grok 4.5 leads

Coding

Like-for-like
Grok 4.5
57.7
Supported · #27/146
Nemotron 3 Ultra
23.4
Supported · #110/146
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 8 vs 7 public rows
Reading
Grok 4.5 leads

Reasoning

Directional only
Grok 4.5
50.4
#28/28
Nemotron 3 Ultra
51.8
#27/28
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Grok 4.5
67.0
Supported · #19/174
Nemotron 3 Ultra
48.9
Estimated · #72/174
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 2 vs 7 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Multimodal

Not comparable
Grok 4.5
79.5
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Grok 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Ultra
89.2
#7/16
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Grok 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Ultra
87.4
#28/125
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Grok 4.5
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology

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

Grok 4.5
$0.005
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

Grok 4.5
$0.118
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

Grok 4.5
$0.16
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.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Grok 4.5

500K

Nemotron 3 Ultra

1M

API model ID

Grok 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 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.

Grok 4.5

$0.3 per 1M cached input tokens

Nemotron 3 Ultra

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Grok 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Grok 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Provider availability

Grok 4.5

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Grok 4.5

Reasoning

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Reasoning

Weight access

Grok 4.5

Proprietary

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Open Weight

License

Grok 4.5

Proprietary

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Open Weight

Release date

Grok 4.5

2026-07-08

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
Grok 4.5 has the higher public point estimate, 63.97 versus 46.68. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Nemotron 3 Ultra has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Grok 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Grok 4.5 has the higher public point estimate, 63.97 versus 46.68. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Grok 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Grok 4.5 has the higher public coding point estimate, 57.7 to 23.4, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Grok 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Grok 4.5 has the higher public agentic tasks point estimate, 57.6 to 26.9, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which costs less, Grok 4.5 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, Grok 4.5 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Nemotron 3 Ultra has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 500K.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence33 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 3.0

    Grok 4.515.7%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Grok 4.583.3%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra56.4%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • deepSwe

    Grok 4.553%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    Grok 4.567.8%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra50.9%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • PinchBench

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra90.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra44.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra70.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra37.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Grok 4.564.7%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    Grok 4.578%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra67.7%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Grok 4.583.3%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra56.4%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • CursorBench 3.2

    Grok 4.566.7%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • VulcanBench v3

    Grok 4.589.9%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    Grok 4.587.4%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra86.0%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    Grok 4.586.6%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra69.0%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • PostTrainBench v1.1

    Grok 4.523.4%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra71.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra89.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra44.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • ARC-AGI-2

    Grok 4.552.6%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-3

    Grok 4.50.3%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • ARC-AGI-1

    Grok 4.585.67%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra—

    Not directly comparable

  • CritPt

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra3.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LongBench v2

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra61.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    Grok 4.592.9%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra86.1%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    Grok 4.589.2%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra85.8%
    Source

    Grok 4.5 leads this result

  • GPQA

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra87%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra87.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra26.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra26.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra86.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra83%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Grok 4.5—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra81.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

33 public results · 8 shared

Watch Grok 4.5 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 5,500+ readers.

Last updated October 7, 2026