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
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Updated September 24, 2026. Rank says Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Both of these models will change. Get the price, version and retirement notices for the pair, each with its source. Follow model changes
Share or export
Decision reading
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the higher public score, 41.88 versus 19.1, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. 5 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
19.1/100
Estimated · Public rank #186
90% interval 9.2–29.0
- Shared results
- 5
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
- 8
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
- 36
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Estimated: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3BHow 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.
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limitedAgentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limitedChat 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-ratesCache-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-ratesRepository 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.
11.4Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.4Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Directional only · BenchAlign v5.7
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scores higher, but at least one score rests on Estimated evidence or a different benchmark set. Directional only, no winner.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
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.
8 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
5 Shared
36 Qwen3.6-35B-A3B only
4 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.
SWE MultilingualCoding
Normalized gap 30.7Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:36.5%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B:67.2%SWE-bench VerifiedCoding
Normalized gap 20.6Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:52.8%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B:73.4%GPQAKnowledge
Normalized gap 10.4Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:75.6%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B:86%MMLU-ProKnowledge
Normalized gap 3.6Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:81.6%Qwen3.6-35B-A3B:85.2%
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 v5.7 lane for agentic, coding, 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.
Agentic
Directional only- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 7.3
- Estimated · #104/105
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 29.6
- Estimated · #67/105
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 11 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Coding
Directional only- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 11.4
- Estimated · #135/135
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 36.4
- Estimated · #68/135
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Knowledge
Directional only- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 20.7
- Estimated · #154/158
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 42.1
- Estimated · #82/158
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 5 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Instruction following
Directional only- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 68.5
- #67/124
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 76.8
- #57/124
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Reasoning
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 55.9
- Unranked · 1 rankable row
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 71.4
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- Not ranked
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 50.0
- #39/50
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- Not ranked
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- Not ranked
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- 70.7
- Unranked · 5 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 | Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 7.3Estimated · #104/105 | 29.6Estimated · #67/105 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 11 public rows | Directional only |
| Coding | 11.4Estimated · #135/135 | 36.4Estimated · #68/135 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 6 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 20.7Estimated · #154/158 | 42.1Estimated · #82/158 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 5 public rows | Directional only |
| Instruction following | 68.5#67/124 | 76.8#57/124 | Directional onlyProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Directional only |
| Reasoning | 55.9Unranked · 1 rankable row | 71.4Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | 50.0#39/50 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | 70.7Unranked · 5 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.7) 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
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 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
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 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
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
- API rate not published
- Fits in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 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.
SpecificationNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
262K
API model ID
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
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 cardQwen3.6-35B-A3B
No comparable hosted API rate
Documented inputs
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Provider availability
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Reasoning
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Reasoning
Weight access
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Open Weight
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Open Weight
License
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Open Weight
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
Open Weight
Release date
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
2026-08-11
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
2026-04-15
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
- Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the higher public score, 41.88 versus 19.1, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
- 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 Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B has the higher public score, 41.88 versus 19.1, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.
Which is better for coding, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scores higher for coding on the public lane, 36.4 to 11.4. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B are scored on Estimated evidence for coding, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for coding from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Qwen3.6-35B-A3B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 29.6 to 7.3. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 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 Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
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 Qwen3.6-35B-A3B?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 262K.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence49 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
PinchBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP483.4%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
BrowseComp
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.8%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP49.5%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B67.2%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B68.7%SourceNot directly comparable
QwenClawBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B52.6%SourceNot directly comparable
QwenWebBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B1397SourceNot directly comparable
VITA-Bench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B35.6%SourceNot directly comparable
DeepPlanning
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B25.9%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B26.9%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B62.8%SourceNot directly comparable
WideResearch
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B60.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Gert Labs
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B42.65%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP452.8%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B73.4%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B leads this result
SWE Multilingual
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.5%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B67.2%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
SciCode
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP431.4%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
SWE-bench Pro
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B49.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B51.5%SourceNot directly comparable
LiveCodeBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B80.4%SourceNot directly comparable
NL2Repo
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B29.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
MMMU
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B81.7%SourceNot directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B75.3%SourceNot directly comparable
RealWorldQA
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B85.3%SourceNot directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B89.9%SourceNot directly comparable
CharXiv
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B78%SourceNot directly comparable
SimpleVQA
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B58.9%SourceNot directly comparable
CC-OCR
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B81.9%SourceNot directly comparable
AI2D_TEST
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B92.7%SourceNot directly comparable
RefCOCO (avg)
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B92.0%SourceNot directly comparable
ODINW13
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B50.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B86.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B82.5%SourceNot directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B83.7%SourceNot directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B86.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
GPQA
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B86%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B leads this result
GPQA-D
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP410.5%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP481.6%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B85.2%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B leads this result
SuperGPQA
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B64.7%SourceNot directly comparable
C-Eval
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B90%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B21.4%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
IFBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP472.9%SourceQwen3.6-35B-A3B—Not directly comparable
Math
HMMT Feb 2025
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B90.7%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Nov 2025
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B89.1%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B83.6%SourceNot directly comparable
MMAnswerBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B78.9%SourceNot directly comparable
AIME26
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Qwen3.6-35B-A3B92.7%SourceNot directly comparable
49 public results · 5 shared
Watch Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.
Last updated September 24, 2026