Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B vs Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

43.32/100
Margin
12.7pts
winning →
56/100
0 category wins3 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B #159 (Estimated); Qwen3.5-35B-A3B #80 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B share 15 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 14 results are unique to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B; 13 to Qwen3.5-35B-A3B.

Updated July 27, 2026
Shared results
15
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
14
Qwen3.5-35B-A3B only
13
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Qwen3.5-35B-A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 56 to 43.32. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 60.6 against 32. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 72.2% to 84.2%.

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B and Qwen3.5-35B-A3B
CategoryNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BΔQwen3.5-35B-A3B
CodingNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0Margin→ 28.6Qwen3.5-35B-A3B60.6
Inst. FollowingNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2Margin→ 17.7Qwen3.5-35B-A3B91.9
KnowledgeNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3Margin→ 5.3Qwen3.5-35B-A3B81.6
AgenticNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-35B-A3B51.0
ReasoningNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-35B-A3B59.0
MultilingualNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.5-35B-A3B81.0
MultimodalNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3MarginNo overlapQwen3.5-35B-A3BNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BB · Qwen3.5-35B-A3B

  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 72.2%B 84.2%
    Winner: Qwen3.5-35B-A3BΔ 12
    GPQA: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 72.2%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 84.2%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.

  2. MMLU-Pro

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 77.3%B 85.3%
    Winner: Qwen3.5-35B-A3BΔ 8
    MMLU-Pro: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 77.3%; Qwen3.5-35B-A3B scored 85.3%. Qwen3.5-35B-A3B wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 outputQwen3.5-35B-A3B$0 input / $0 outputListed prices are equal.
Generation speedtokens per secondNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot availableQwen3.5-35B-A3BNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot availableQwen3.5-35B-A3BNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256KQwen3.5-35B-A3B262KQwen3.5-35B-A3B lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
OSWorldSource 47.4%—Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 45.3%89.2%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
GDPval-AASource 0.0%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 465—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —40.5%Not comparable
BrowseCompSource —61%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —54.5%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource —28.96%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
SciCodeSource 32%—Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 27.8%37.7%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
AA Coding IndexSource 13.8%—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource —69.2%Not comparable
SWE-RebenchSource —53.7%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
AA-LCRSource 35.7%62.7%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.9%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
LongBench v2Source —59%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
MMLU-ProSource 77.3%85.3%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
GPQASource 72.2%84.2%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
GPQA-DSource 72.2%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 14.9%29.3%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 46.9%84.5%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
AA-HLESource 5.3%19.7%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -56.0%-46.4%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 14.8%20.5%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 83.1%84.0%Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads
SuperGPQASource —63.4%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
AIME 2025Source 82.1%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
MMLU-ProXSource —81%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
MMMUSource 70.8%81.4%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
MMLongBench-DocSource 57.5%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 76.3%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 57.8%—Not comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source 72.2%—Not comparable
AI2D_TESTSource 88.5%—Not comparable
RefCOCO (avg)Source 90.5%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 53.2%72.7%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
MMVUSource —72.3%Not comparable
MathVisionSource —83.9%Not comparable
V*Source —92.7%Not comparable
Inst. FollowingQwen3.5-35B-A3B wins
BenchmarkNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BQwen3.5-35B-A3BResult
IFBenchSource 74.2%—Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 63.2%72.5%Qwen3.5-35B-A3B leads
IFEvalSource —91.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 56 to 43.32. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 72.2% and 84.2%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.6 versus 76.3. Inside this category, AA-GPQA Diamond is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 60.6 versus 32. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B or Qwen3.5-35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5-35B-A3B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 91.9 versus 74.2. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

NVIDIA Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 27, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.