Skip to main content

Model comparison

MiniMax M3 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

MiniMax
69.8/100
Margin
25.7pts
← winning
1 category wins1 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: MiniMax M3 #18; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B unranked

BenchAlign evidence: MiniMax M3 supported; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. MiniMax M3 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 13 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 32 results are unique to MiniMax M3; 15 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
13
MiniMax M3 only
32
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
15
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick MiniMax M3 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 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

MiniMax M3 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 70 to 45. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

MiniMax M3's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 72.2 against 32. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

MiniMax M3 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.30 input / $1.20 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while MiniMax M3 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. MiniMax M3 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 scores and score margins for MiniMax M3 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
CategoryMiniMax M3ΔNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
CodingMiniMax M372.2Margin 40.2Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0
MultimodalMiniMax M364.9Margin 11.4Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3
AgenticMiniMax M372.3MarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured
KnowledgeMiniMax M3Not measuredMarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.4
MathMiniMax M385.7MarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measured
Inst. FollowingMiniMax M3Not measuredMarginNo overlapNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMiniMax M3$0.3 input / $1.2 outputNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 outputNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondMiniMax M3Not availableNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMiniMax M3Not availableNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMiniMax M31MNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256KMiniMax M3 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource 83.5%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 70.1%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 74.2%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 74.5%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 35.4%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 88.9%45.3%MiniMax M3 leads
GDPval-AASource 44.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1395Not comparable
GDPval rubricsSource 74.7%Not comparable
BankerToolBenchSource 76.1%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 19.8%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 4.6%Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1110Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 32.1%Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 6.7%Not comparable
OSWorldSource 47.4%Not comparable
CodingMiniMax M3 wins
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 80.5%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 59%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 66.0%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource 42.1%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 58.6%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 42.4%8.3%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 45.4%27.8%MiniMax M3 leads
VIBE V2Source 50.1%Not comparable
SVG-BenchSource 63.7%Not comparable
KernelBench HardSource 28.8%Not comparable
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source 65.2%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench v5Source 63.2%Not comparable
SciCodeSource 32%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
AA-LCRSource 74.0%35.7%MiniMax M3 leads
CritPtSource 3.7%0.0%MiniMax M3 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 44.4%14.9%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.9%46.9%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-HLESource 37.1%5.3%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 1.4%-56.0%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 15.0%14.8%MiniMax M3 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 16.1%83.1%MiniMax M3 leads
AA Openness IndexSource 33.3%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource 77.3%Not comparable
GPQASource 72.2%Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 72.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
USAMO 2026Source 85.7%Not comparable
AIME 2025Source 82.1%Not comparable
MultimodalNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
OfficeQA ProSource 45.1%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source 91.6%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 78.1%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource 84.6%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source 85.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1294Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.6%53.2%MiniMax M3 leads
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
Inst. Following
BenchmarkMiniMax M3Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BResult
AA-IFBenchSource 82.9%63.2%MiniMax M3 leads
IFBenchSource 74.2%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, MiniMax M3 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

MiniMax M3 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 70 to 45.

Which is better for coding, MiniMax M3 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

MiniMax M3 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 72.2 versus 32. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench Hard is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, MiniMax M3 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.3 versus 64.9. Inside this category, AA-MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 16, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.