Holo3-122B-A10B vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 500B

Pick Holo3-122B-A10B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Ultra 500B only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 10M context window.

Holo3-122B-A10B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 79 to 60. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Holo3-122B-A10B's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 78.9 against 62.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is OSWorld-Verified, 78.8% to 58%.

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 500B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Nemotron 3 Ultra 500B 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 500B gives you the larger context window at 10M, compared with 64K for Holo3-122B-A10B.