Model comparison
Holo3-122B-A10B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Evidence parity. Holo3-122B-A10B and Nemotron 3 Ultra share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Holo3-122B-A10B; 38 to Nemotron 3 Ultra.
Updated July 21, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Holo3-122B-A10B only
- 1
- Nemotron 3 Ultra only
- 38
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Holo3-122B-A10B makes more sense if agentic is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Nemotron 3 Ultra is the better fit if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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
Holo3-122B-A10B and Nemotron 3 Ultra finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Holo3-122B-A10B is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.40 input / $3.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Nemotron 3 Ultra. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Nemotron 3 Ultra is the reasoning model in the pair, while Holo3-122B-A10B 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 Ultra gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Holo3-122B-A10B | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Holo3-122B-A10B$0.4 input / $3 output | Nemotron 3 Ultra$0 input / $0 output | Nemotron 3 Ultra has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | Nemotron 3 UltraNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Holo3-122B-A10BNot available | Nemotron 3 UltraNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Holo3-122B-A10B64K | Nemotron 3 Ultra1M | Nemotron 3 Ultra lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticHolo3-122B-A10B wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-122B-A10B | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 78.8% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 56.4% | Not comparable |
| PinchBenchSource | — | 90.0% | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | — | 44.4% | Not comparable |
| τ³-bench resultsSource | — | 70.9% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 33.2% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/ toolsSource | — | 37.4% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 27.4% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 83.3% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1164 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 870 | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 28.9% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 81.7% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 36.4% | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
Knowledge12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-122B-A10B | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | — | 87% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 87.0% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 26.7% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 26.7% | Not comparable |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 86.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 21.6% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 37.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 86.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 26.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | -0.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 28.5% | Not comparable |
| AA Openness IndexSource | — | 83.3% | Not comparable |
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-122B-A10B | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProXSource | — | 83% | Not comparable |
Multimodal1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Holo3-122B-A10B | Nemotron 3 Ultra | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena WebsiteSource | — | 1129 | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Holo3-122B-A10B or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Holo3-122B-A10B and Nemotron 3 Ultra are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Holo3-122B-A10B or Nemotron 3 Ultra?
Holo3-122B-A10B has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.9 versus 51.3. Nemotron 3 Ultra stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.