| Signal | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B | Delta | Nemotron 3 Super |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | -- | |
Pricing | 0 | 0 | |
Context window size | 86 | -- | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 5 | 1 wins |
7
days higher
5
days
18
days higher
NVIDIA
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B saves you $20.00/month
That's $240.00/year compared to Nemotron 3 Super at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B | Nemotron 3 Super | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 74 | 74 | -- |
| Rank | #121 | #120 | Nemotron 3 Super |
| Quality Rank | #121 | #120 | Nemotron 3 Super |
| Adoption Rank | #121 | #120 | Nemotron 3 Super |
| Parameters | 30B | 120B | -- |
| Context Window | 262K | 262K | -- |
| Pricing | $0.05/$0.20/M | $0.10/$0.50/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 67 | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B |
| Pricing | 0 | 1 | Nemotron 3 Super |
| Context window size | 86 | 86 | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 20 | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B |
Our composite score (0–100) combines six weighted signals: benchmark performance (25%), pricing efficiency (25%), context window size (15%), model recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and capability versatility (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 74/100 (rank #121), placing it in the top 59% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 74/100 (rank #120), placing it in the top 59% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B offers 58% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $3.75/month with Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B vs $9.00/month with Nemotron 3 Super - a $5.25 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (262K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.20/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (74/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
58% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by NVIDIA
| Capability | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B | Nemotron 3 Super |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
NVIDIA
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B saves you $0.4500/month
That's 58% cheaper than Nemotron 3 Super at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B | Nemotron 3 Super |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 262K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | -- |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Dec 14, 2025 | Mar 11, 2026 |
Both Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B and Nemotron 3 Super score 74/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B is ranked #121 and Nemotron 3 Super is ranked #120 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (25%), pricing (25%), context window (15%), recency (15%), output capacity (10%), and versatility (10%). Scores update hourly.
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B is cheaper at $0.20/M output tokens vs Nemotron 3 Super's $0.50/M output tokens - 2.5x more expensive. Input token pricing: Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B at $0.05/M vs Nemotron 3 Super at $0.10/M.
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B has a larger context window of 262,144 tokens compared to Nemotron 3 Super's 262,144 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.