Skip to main content
Radar

Provider changes are easy to miss. Radar watches releases, pricing, deprecations, and incidents at the source.Provider changes are easy to miss.

See Radar
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

Updated August 11, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

NVIDIA

26.9/100

Estimated · Public rank #204

90% interval 17.1–36.8

Nemotron 3 Ultra

NVIDIA

46.0/100

Estimated · Public rank #151

90% interval 36.1–55.8

Nemotron 3 Ultra has the higher public score estimate, 45.97 versus 26.93, but the 90% score intervals overlap. Treat that as a lead, not a settled winner.

13 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.

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Nemotron 3 Ultra

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads on the same 2 weighted benchmark rows.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

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

    Nemotron 3 Ultra

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads on the same 2 weighted benchmark rows.

    Confidence: limited

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

  • 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: listed-rates

  • 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
13
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
0
Nemotron 3 Ultra only
6
Like-for-like categories
3 / 8

1 category uses different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

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

Like-for-like
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
29.1
Nemotron 3 Ultra
51.3
Weighted basis
2 vs 2 rows
Reading
Nemotron 3 Ultra leads

Coding

Like-for-like
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
42.1
Nemotron 3 Ultra
58.3
Weighted basis
2 vs 2 rows
Reading
Nemotron 3 Ultra leads

Instruction following

Like-for-like
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
72.9
Nemotron 3 Ultra
81.7
Weighted basis
1 vs 1 rows
Reading
Nemotron 3 Ultra leads

Knowledge

Directional only
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
80.5
Nemotron 3 Ultra
53.8
Weighted basis
2 vs 3 rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Ultra
61.9
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Ultra
83.0
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not measured
Nemotron 3 Ultra
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.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Nemotron 3 Ultra has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Nemotron 3 Ultra has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable
Nemotron 3 Ultra
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Nemotron 3 Ultra 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.

API model ID

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

No comparable hosted API rate

NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning model card

Nemotron 3 Ultra

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Provider availability

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Reasoning

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Reasoning

Weight access

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Open Weight

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Open Weight

License

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Open Weight

Nemotron 3 Ultra

Open Weight

Release date

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

2026-08-11

Nemotron 3 Ultra

2026-06-04

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
Both entries list NVIDIA as the provider. Confirm endpoint, model ID, limits, and feature support before switching.
Quality signal
Nemotron 3 Ultra has the higher public score estimate, 45.97 versus 26.93, but the 90% score intervals overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 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 evidence19 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra56.4%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • PinchBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP483.4%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra90.0%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • BrowseComp

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.8%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra44.4%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • τ³-bench results

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP49.5%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra70.9%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • HLE w/ tools

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra37.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP452.8%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra71.9%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • SWE Multilingual

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.5%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra67.7%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra56.4%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • SciCode

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP431.4%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra44.6%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra89.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • CritPt

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra3.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LongBench v2

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra61.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra87%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra87.0%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • HLE w/o tools

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP410.5%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra26.7%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP481.6%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra86.8%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

  • HLE

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra26.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Nemotron 3 Ultra83%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP472.9%
    Source
    Nemotron 3 Ultra81.7%
    Source

    Nemotron 3 Ultra leads this result

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Nemotron 3 Ultra has the higher public score estimate, 45.97 versus 26.93, but the 90% score intervals overlap. The higher estimate is not a decisive winner because the uncertainty ranges overlap.

Which is better for coding, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Nemotron 3 Ultra leads the like-for-like coding comparison across 2 shared weighted benchmark rows.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Nemotron 3 Ultra leads the like-for-like agentic tasks comparison across 2 shared weighted benchmark rows.

Which costs less, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

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, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Nemotron 3 Ultra?

Both models list the same context window, 1M.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated August 11, 2026

Watch Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Nemotron 3 Ultra

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.