Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2-Flash #96 (Supported); Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B #159 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 17 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to MiMo-V2-Flash; 12 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- MiMo-V2-Flash only
- 2
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 12
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2-Flash if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
MiMo-V2-Flash is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 53.16 to 43.32. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2-Flash's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 73.4 against 32. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 83.7% to 72.2%.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | MiMo-V2-Flash | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | MiMo-V2-Flash73.4 | Margin← 41.4 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | MiMo-V2-Flash84.7 | Margin← 8.4 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | MiMo-V2-FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 83.7%B 72.2%Winner: MiMo-V2-FlashΔ 11.5GPQA: MiMo-V2-Flash scored 83.7%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 72.2%. MiMo-V2-Flash wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMLU-Pro
KnowledgeA 84.9%B 77.3%Winner: MiMo-V2-FlashΔ 7.6MMLU-Pro: MiMo-V2-Flash scored 84.9%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 77.3%. MiMo-V2-Flash wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | MiMo-V2-Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2-Flash$0 input / $0 output | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | Listed prices are equal. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2-Flash129 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2-Flash2.14 s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2-Flash256K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
CodingMiMo-V2-Flash wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeMiMo-V2-Flash wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 83.7% | 72.2% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | 84.9% | 77.3% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 24.7% | 14.9% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 65.6% | 46.9% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 8.0% | 5.3% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -48.5% | -56.0% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 15.2% | 14.8% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 75.1% | 83.1% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | 94.1% | 82.1% | MiMo-V2-Flash leads |
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMUSource | — | 70.8% | Not comparable |
| MMLongBench-DocSource | — | 57.5% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 76.3% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| AI2D_TESTSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 90.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, MiMo-V2-Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
MiMo-V2-Flash is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 53.16 to 43.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 83.7% and 72.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, MiMo-V2-Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 84.7 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-GPQA Diamond is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, MiMo-V2-Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
MiMo-V2-Flash has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 73.4 versus 32. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Know when it’s worth switching models
The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.