Model comparison
MiMo-V2-Pro vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 11 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: MiMo-V2-Pro #23 (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-Pro and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 11 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 4 results are unique to MiMo-V2-Pro; 18 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 27, 2026- Shared results
- 11
- MiMo-V2-Pro only
- 4
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 18
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick MiMo-V2-Pro 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 11 shared benchmark results across 5 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
MiMo-V2-Pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 66.79 to 43.32. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
MiMo-V2-Pro's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 78 against 32.
MiMo-V2-Pro gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
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-Pro | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | MiMo-V2-Pro78.0 | Margin← 46.0 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Knowledge | MiMo-V2-ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Multimodal | MiMo-V2-ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | MiMo-V2-ProNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | MiMo-V2-Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | MiMo-V2-ProNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | MiMo-V2-ProNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | MiMo-V2-ProNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | MiMo-V2-Pro1M | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | MiMo-V2-Pro lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 57.8% | — | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | 95% | 45.3% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| Gert LabsSource | 36.68% | — | Not comparable |
| ResearchClawBenchSource | 15.3% | — | Not comparable |
| OSWorldSource | — | 47.4% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 0.0% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 465 | Not comparable |
CodingMiMo-V2-Pro wins4 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 40.3% | 14.9% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 87.0% | 46.9% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| AA-HLESource | 28.3% | 5.3% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | 4.9% | -56.0% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 26.8% | 14.8% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 29.9% | 83.1% | MiMo-V2-Pro leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | MiMo-V2-Pro | 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 (2)
Which is better, MiMo-V2-Pro or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
MiMo-V2-Pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 66.79 to 43.32.
Which is better for coding, MiMo-V2-Pro or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
MiMo-V2-Pro has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 78 versus 32. Inside this category, AA-SciCode 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.