Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 74B |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $3.00Amazon Bedrock | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $15.00Amazon Bedrock | — |
| $1,350Amazon Bedrock | — | |
| Benchmarks | ||
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 75.4% | 86.43% |
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 30% | — |
SWE-Bench VerifiedCoding — Real coding tasks pulled from open-source projects — the AI has to find and fix actual bugs. A human-checked version of the original SWE-Bench. Higher is better. | 72.7% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 50.98% |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | — | 52.2% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | — | 66.75% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Anthropic | NVIDIA |
| Release date | May 22 2025 | Oct 15 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Claude Sonnet 4vsGPT-6.1 SolNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsGPT-6.1 SolClaude Sonnet 4vsGemini 4 ArgonNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsGemini 4 ArgonClaude Sonnet 4vsMuse Spark OpenNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsMuse Spark OpenClaude Sonnet 4vsGrok 4.7Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsGrok 4.7Claude Sonnet 4vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashClaude Sonnet 4vsMistral Large 4Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B leads Claude Sonnet 4 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (GPQA Diamond). Claude Sonnet 4 shipped 511 days before Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Claude Sonnet 4 is closed, while Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B is open weight.
On GPQA Diamond, Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B leads at 86.43% vs Claude Sonnet 4 at 75.4%.