Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) vs Step 3.7 Flash
| Signal | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) | Delta | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 67 | -17 | |
Pricing | 98 | -1 | |
Context window size | 91 | +5 | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 20 | -70 | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 5 | 3 wins |
Score History
40
current score
Tied
right now
40
current score
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch)
NVIDIA
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun
Step 3.7 Flash saves you $42.50/month
That's $510.00/year compared to Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) | Step 3.7 Flash | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 40 | -- |
| Rank | #257 | #259 | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) |
| Quality Rank | #257 | #259 | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) |
| Adoption Rank | #257 | #259 | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) |
| Parameters | 550B | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 512K | 262K | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) |
| Pricing | $0.30/$1.80/M | $0.20/$1.15/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 67 | 83 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Pricing | 98 | 99 | Step 3.7 Flash |
| Context window size | 91 | 86 | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) |
| Output Capacity | 20 | 90 | Step 3.7 Flash |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.
Scores 40/100 (rank #257), placing it in the top 12% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #259), placing it in the top 11% 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.
Choose Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) when you need:
- Processing long documents or large codebases (512K token context)
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Choose Step 3.7 Flash when you need:
- High-volume production workloads where API costs must be minimized
- Multimodal workflows that require image understanding
- Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
- Self-hosted deployments where you need full control over the model
Step 3.7 Flash offers 36% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $20.25/month with Step 3.7 Flash vs $31.50/month with Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) - a $11.25 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
Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Step 3.7 Flash also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (512K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($1.15/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) and Step 3.7 Flash 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.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch)
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Step 3.7 Flash
36% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch)
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch)
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch)
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by NVIDIA
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
| Capability | Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch)
NVIDIA
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun
Step 3.7 Flash saves you $0.9600/month
That's 36% cheaper than Nemotron 3 Ultra (batch) 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 Ultra (batch) | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 512K | 262K |
| Max Output Tokens | -- | 256,000 |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Jun 4, 2026 | May 28, 2026 |