Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Qwen3.5 397B

Updated November 9, 2026. Rank says Qwen3.5 397B is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

Decision reading

Qwen3.5 397B has the higher public point estimate, 55.17 versus 25.47. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 7 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
NVIDIA logo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

NVIDIA

25.47/100

Estimated · Public rank #199

Conditional range 11.1–39.8

Model B
Alibaba logo
Qwen3.5 397B

Alibaba

55.17/100

Estimated · Public rank #72

Conditional range 40.8–69.5

Shared results
7
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
6
Qwen3.5 397B only
55
Like-for-like categories
1 / 8
Estimated: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.5 397B. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works

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 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 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

    Qwen3.5 397B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.5 397B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    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

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate.

    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

Which one for a specific job

Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.

The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.

18.7Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.5 397B

Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8

The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.

Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.

Open the coding leaderboardShortlist models for this job
Same basis rules as the category table below

What is actually comparable

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

2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

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.

Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 lane for agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Instruction following

Like-for-like
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
71.4
#77/157
Qwen3.5 397B
79.9
#63/157
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Qwen3.5 397B leads

Agentic

Directional only
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
19.3
Estimated · #120/132
Qwen3.5 397B
45.2
Estimated · #59/132
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 14 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Knowledge

Directional only
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
29.1
Estimated · #155/179
Qwen3.5 397B
51.9
Estimated · #72/179
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Coding

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
18.7
Estimated · #141/158
Qwen3.5 397B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
53.8
Estimated · #46/67
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 22 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
93.8
#5/17
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not ranked
Qwen3.5 397B
72.7
Unranked · 5 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, reasoning, multimodal, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Bars run 0–100Methodology

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
Qwen3.5 397B
$0.0024
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 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
Qwen3.5 397B
$0.0408
Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 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
Qwen3.5 397B
$0.168
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate

Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate.

Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished

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

Qwen3.5 397B

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

Qwen3.5 397B

Not published

Documented inputs

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Qwen3.5 397B

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Qwen3.5 397B

Not sourced

Provider availability

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Not sourced

Qwen3.5 397B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Reasoning

Qwen3.5 397B

Non-Reasoning

Weight access

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Open Weight

Qwen3.5 397B

Open Weight

License

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

Open Weight

Qwen3.5 397B

Open Weight

Release date

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4

2026-08-11

Qwen3.5 397B

2026-02-16

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
Qwen3.5 397B has the higher public point estimate, 55.17 versus 25.47. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented window (1M).
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Qwen3.5 397B has the higher public point estimate, 55.17 versus 25.47. Their conditional score ranges do not overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Qwen3.5 397B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Qwen3.5 397B?

Qwen3.5 397B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 45.2 to 19.3. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.5 397B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Qwen3.5 397B?

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 Qwen3.5 397B?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 128K.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$298
Break-even—
Qwen3.5 397B
API / mo$3,150
Self-host / mo$13,981
Break-even311M/day
Model the full break-even

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence68 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • PinchBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP483.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B69%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • τ³-bench results

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP49.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B68.4%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B52.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld-Verified

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B62.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B56.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • QwenClawBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B51.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VITA-Bench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B43.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepPlanning

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B37.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B36.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B46.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP-Tasks

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B74.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WideResearch

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B74.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B46.76%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ResearchClawBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B14.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP452.8%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B76.2%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • SWE Multilingual

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B69.3%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP431.4%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B83.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B50.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B32.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B52.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • LongBench v2

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B63.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AI-Needle

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B68.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B85.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMMU-Pro

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B79%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RealWorldQA

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B83.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OmniDocBench 1.5

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B90.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (with subtitle)

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Video-MME (w/o subtitle)

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B83.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MathVision

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B88.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • We-Math

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DynaMath

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B86.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SimpleVQA

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B67.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B80.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLongBench-Doc

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B61.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CC-OCR

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B82.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AI2D_TEST

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B93.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CountBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B97.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • RefCOCO (avg)

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B92.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ODINW13

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B47.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ERQA

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B67.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • VideoMMMU

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B84.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MLVU (M-Avg)

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B86.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ScreenSpot Pro

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B65.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • V*

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B95.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B88.4%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • GPQA-D

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP410.5%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP481.6%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B87.8%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • SuperGPQA

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B70.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Redux

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B94.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • C-Eval

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B93%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B28.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Multilingual

  • MMLU-ProX

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B84.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • NOVA-63

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B59.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • INCLUDE

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B85.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • PolyMath

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B73.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MAXIFE

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B88.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP472.9%
    Source
    Qwen3.5 397B76.5%
    Source

    Qwen3.5 397B leads this result

  • IFEval

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B92.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME26

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B93.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2025

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B94.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Nov 2025

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B92.7%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B87.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MMAnswerBench

    Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—
    Qwen3.5 397B80.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

68 public results · 7 shared

Related comparisons

Compare API pricingRead the methodologyOpen the model selector

Watch Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Qwen3.5 397B

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

Read a sample issue

Join 6,100+ subscribers.

Last updated November 9, 2026