Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Grok Build 0.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Updated October 2, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVAPI/MCP

Decision reading

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead. 0 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

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Model B
NVIDIA logo

NVIDIA

31.29/100

Estimated · Public rank #160

Conditional range 16.9–45.6

Shared results
0
Grok Build 0.1 only
1
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
16
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8
Estimated: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B. 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.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Grok Build 0.1 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited
  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    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

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.

25.2Grok Build 0.117.5Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Directional only · BenchAlign v5.8

Grok Build 0.1 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.

1 category rests 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.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

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.

Coding

Directional only
Grok Build 0.1
25.2
Estimated · #106/144
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
17.5
Estimated · #128/144
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Agentic

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
27.8
Estimated · #87/119
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 1 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
49.5
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
40.3
#43/49
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
31.0
Supported · #131/171
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
72.4
#62/125
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Grok Build 0.1
Not ranked
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
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 Build 0.1
$0.002
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Grok Build 0.1
$0.056
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Grok Build 0.1
$0.08
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B 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 Build 0.1

256K

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

256K

API model ID

Grok Build 0.1

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Grok Build 0.1

$0.2 per 1M cached input tokens

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Grok Build 0.1

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Grok Build 0.1

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Not sourced

Provider availability

Grok Build 0.1

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Grok Build 0.1

Non-Reasoning

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Reasoning

Weight access

Grok Build 0.1

Proprietary

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Open Weight

License

Grok Build 0.1

Proprietary

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Open Weight

Release date

Grok Build 0.1

2026-05-20

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

2026-04-28

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
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 256K.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Grok Build 0.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Grok Build 0.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Grok Build 0.1 scores higher for coding on the public lane, 25.2 to 17.5. Grok Build 0.1 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Grok Build 0.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Grok Build 0.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

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 Build 0.1 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Both models list the same context window, 256K.

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence17 rows

Agentic

  • Gert Labs

    Grok Build 0.149.15%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B—

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B47.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ²-bench results

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B45.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • LiveCodeBench v5

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B63.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B70.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLongBench-Doc

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B57.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B57.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (w/o subtitle)

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B72.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AI2D_TEST

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B88.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RefCOCO (avg)

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B90.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • MMLU-Pro

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B77.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B72.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B72.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME 2025

    Grok Build 0.1—
    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B82.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

17 public results · 0 shared

Watch Grok Build 0.1 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.

Last updated October 2, 2026