Model comparison
Nemotron 3 Super 100B vs Step 3.5 Flash
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Nemotron 3 Super 100B #121 (Estimated); Step 3.5 Flash #90 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Nemotron 3 Super 100B and Step 3.5 Flash share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Nemotron 3 Super 100B; 0 to Step 3.5 Flash.
Updated July 28, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Nemotron 3 Super 100B only
- 1
- Step 3.5 Flash only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Nemotron 3 Super 100B and Step 3.5 Flash is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM does not have sourced benchmark coverage for Step 3.5 Flash yet. This comparison is currently limited to metadata such as context window, reasoning mode, and pricing where available.
Step 3.5 Flash is priced at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for Nemotron 3 Super 100B. Nemotron 3 Super 100B has the larger context window at 1M, compared with 256K for Step 3.5 Flash.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Nemotron 3 Super 100B | Step 3.5 Flash | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Nemotron 3 Super 100B$0 input / $0 output | Step 3.5 Flash$0.1 input / $0.3 output | Nemotron 3 Super 100B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Nemotron 3 Super 100B367 tok/s | Step 3.5 Flash87 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Super 100B has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Nemotron 3 Super 100B0.71 s | Step 3.5 Flash3.03 s | Nemotron 3 Super 100B reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Nemotron 3 Super 100B1M | Step 3.5 Flash256K | Nemotron 3 Super 100B lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3 Super 100B | Step 3.5 Flash | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claw-EvalSource | 5.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Nemotron 3 Super 100B and Step 3.5 Flash on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Nemotron 3 Super 100B and Step 3.5 Flash today?
Nemotron 3 Super 100B: $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens Step 3.5 Flash: $0.10 input / $0.30 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
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.