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 Sarvam 30B
Updated November 9, 2026. Rank says Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Share or export
Decision reading
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the higher public point estimate, 25.47 versus 23.6. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 3 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
25.47/100
Estimated · Public rank #199
Conditional range 11.1–39.8
- Shared results
- 3
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
- 10
- Sarvam 30B only
- 6
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Estimated: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 and Sarvam 30B. 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.
Show secondary and unsupported calls
Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Sarvam 30B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limitedAgentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Sarvam 30B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.
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
The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Sarvam 30B does not fit this workload in one request. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Sarvam 30B has no comparable published API token rate.
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.
18.7Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Sarvam 30B
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.
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.
10 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 only
3 Shared
6 Sarvam 30B only
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.
SWE-bench VerifiedCoding
Normalized gap 18.8Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:52.8%Sarvam 30B:34%MMLU-ProKnowledge
Normalized gap 1.6Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:81.6%Sarvam 30B:80%BrowseCompAgentic
Normalized gap 1.3Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4:36.8%Sarvam 30B:35.5%
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.
Knowledge
Directional only- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 29.1
- Estimated · #155/179
- Sarvam 30B
- 27.4
- Supported · #165/179
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Instruction following
Directional only- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 71.4
- #77/157
- Sarvam 30B
- 28.8
- #148/157
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Agentic
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 19.3
- Estimated · #120/132
- Sarvam 30B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 1 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- 18.7
- Estimated · #141/158
- Sarvam 30B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 2 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- Not ranked
- Sarvam 30B
- 21.4
- Estimated · #147/157
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 1 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- Not ranked
- Sarvam 30B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
- Not ranked
- Sarvam 30B
- 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
- Sarvam 30B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 | Sarvam 30B | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | 29.1Estimated · #155/179 | 27.4Supported · #165/179 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 2 public rows | Directional only |
| Instruction following | 71.4#77/157 | 28.8#148/157 | Directional onlyProvisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows | Directional only |
| Agentic | 19.3Estimated · #120/132 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 1 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | 18.7Estimated · #141/158 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 4 vs 2 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | Not ranked | 21.4Estimated · #147/157 | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 1 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 0 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | 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.
Supported evidence per lane · 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
- Sarvam 30B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Sarvam 30B 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
- Sarvam 30B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Sarvam 30B 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
- Sarvam 30B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
Sarvam 30B does not fit this workload in one request. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has no comparable published API token rate. Sarvam 30B 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 NVFP4Sarvam 30B
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Sarvam 30B
64K
API model ID
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Sarvam 30B
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 cardSarvam 30B
No comparable hosted API rate
Documented inputs
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Sarvam 30B
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Sarvam 30B
Not sourced
Provider availability
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Not sourced
Sarvam 30B
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Reasoning
Sarvam 30B
Reasoning
Weight access
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Open Weight
Sarvam 30B
Open Weight
License
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
Open Weight
Sarvam 30B
Open Weight
Release date
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4
2026-08-11
Sarvam 30B
2026-03-06
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
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the higher public point estimate, 25.47 versus 23.6. Their conditional score ranges 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 Sarvam 30B?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the higher public point estimate, 25.47 versus 23.6. Their conditional score ranges 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 Sarvam 30B?
Sarvam 30B 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 Sarvam 30B?
Sarvam 30B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.
Which costs less, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 or Sarvam 30B?
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 Sarvam 30B?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 64K.
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—
Sarvam 30B
API / mo$0
Self-host / mo$298
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 evidence19 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
PinchBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP483.4%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
BrowseComp
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.8%SourceSarvam 30B35.5%SourceNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 leads this result
τ³-bench results
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP49.5%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP452.8%SourceSarvam 30B34%SourceNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 leads this result
SWE Multilingual
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP436.5%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP423.5%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
SciCode
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP431.4%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
HumanEval
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Sarvam 30B92.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Sarvam 30B66.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
GPQA
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
GPQA-D
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP475.6%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
HLE w/o tools
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP410.5%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
MMLU-Pro
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP481.6%SourceSarvam 30B80%SourceNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 leads this result
MMLU
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4—Sarvam 30B85.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
IFBench
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP472.9%SourceSarvam 30B—Not directly comparable
Math
19 public results · 3 shared
Watch Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B NVFP4 vs Sarvam 30B
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 6,100+ subscribers.
Last updated November 9, 2026