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. | — | 9B |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.30Relace | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $1.8966StreamLake | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
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. | 14% | 5% |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | 93.5% | 71.1% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 90.1% | 64% |
CheatBenchCheating rate — Measures how often AI agents try to cheat on difficult assignments, such as reading hidden answers, copying work or manipulating grading. The overall score gives equal weight to ten categories; the sycophancy category measures how far an agent shifts its beliefs toward a user's stated views. Scores describe each model in its tested agent setup, and task success is measured separately. Lower is better. | 75.1% | — |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 83.4% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | DeepSeek | NVIDIA |
| Release date | Apr 24 2026 | Aug 18 2025 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
DeepSeek-V4-ProvsClaude Haiku 5.5Nemotron Nano 2vsClaude Haiku 5.5DeepSeek-V4-ProvsGPT-6.1 SolNemotron Nano 2vsGPT-6.1 SolDeepSeek-V4-ProvsGemini 4 ArgonNemotron Nano 2vsGemini 4 ArgonDeepSeek-V4-ProvsMuse Spark 1.3Nemotron Nano 2vsMuse Spark 1.3DeepSeek-V4-ProvsGrok 4.7Nemotron Nano 2vsGrok 4.7DeepSeek-V4-ProvsMistral Large 4Nemotron Nano 2vsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
DeepSeek-V4-Pro leads Nemotron Nano 2 on 3 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (BullshitBench v2, LiveCodeBench, GPQA Diamond). Nemotron Nano 2 shipped 249 days before DeepSeek-V4-Pro, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On BullshitBench v2, DeepSeek-V4-Pro leads at 14% vs Nemotron Nano 2 at 5%. On LiveCodeBench, DeepSeek-V4-Pro leads at 93.5% vs Nemotron Nano 2 at 71.1%. On GPQA Diamond, DeepSeek-V4-Pro leads at 90.1% vs Nemotron Nano 2 at 64%.