Skip to main content

Model comparison

Ministral 3 3B vs Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Updated July 28, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Ministral 3 3B

Mistral

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

NVIDIA

49.3/100

Estimated · Public rank #121

90% interval 37.7–60.8

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.

0 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Nemotron 3 Super 100B

    Nemotron 3 Super 100B has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
0
Ministral 3 3B only
0
Nemotron 3 Super 100B only
1
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Agentic

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Ministral 3 3B
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Ministral 3 3B
$0.00015
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Super 100B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Ministral 3 3B
$0.0053
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Super 100B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Ministral 3 3B
$0.023
Fits in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Nemotron 3 Super 100B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Ministral 3 3B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Nemotron 3 Super 100B has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Ministral 3 3B

256K

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

1M

API model ID

Ministral 3 3B

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Ministral 3 3B

Not published

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Ministral 3 3B

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Ministral 3 3B

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Not sourced

Provider availability

Ministral 3 3B

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Ministral 3 3B

Non-Reasoning

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Non-Reasoning

Weight access

Ministral 3 3B

Open Weight

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Open Weight

License

Ministral 3 3B

Open Weight

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

Open Weight

Release date

Ministral 3 3B

2025-12-02

Nemotron 3 Super 100B

2026-01-15

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Nemotron 3 Super 100B has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence1 rows

Agentic

  • Claw-Eval

    Ministral 3 3B
    Nemotron 3 Super 100B5.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Ministral 3 3B or Nemotron 3 Super 100B?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Ministral 3 3B or Nemotron 3 Super 100B?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Ministral 3 3B or Nemotron 3 Super 100B?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, Ministral 3 3B or Nemotron 3 Super 100B?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Ministral 3 3B or Nemotron 3 Super 100B?

Nemotron 3 Super 100B has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 256K.

Related comparisons

Last updated July 28, 2026

Keep the decision current

One weekly note on benchmark changes, pricing moves, and models worth re-testing.