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 | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $0.30 | — |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | $2.50 | — |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | $0.03 | — |
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. | $0.15Google AI Studio | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $1.25Google AI Studio | — |
| 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. | 19% | 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. | — | 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. | — | 64% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | NVIDIA | |
| Release date | Apr 17 2025 | Aug 18 2025 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Gemini 2.5 FlashvsClaude Haiku 5.5Nemotron Nano 2vsClaude Haiku 5.5Gemini 2.5 FlashvsGPT-6.1 SolNemotron Nano 2vsGPT-6.1 SolGemini 2.5 FlashvsMuse Spark 1.3Nemotron Nano 2vsMuse Spark 1.3Gemini 2.5 FlashvsGrok 4.7Nemotron Nano 2vsGrok 4.7Gemini 2.5 FlashvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashNemotron Nano 2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGemini 2.5 FlashvsMistral Large 4Nemotron Nano 2vsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Gemini 2.5 Flash leads Nemotron Nano 2 on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (BullshitBench v2). Only Gemini 2.5 Flash has a verified first-party API price: $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Nemotron Nano 2. Gemini 2.5 Flash shipped 123 days before Nemotron Nano 2, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Gemini 2.5 Flash is closed, while Nemotron Nano 2 is open weight.
On BullshitBench v2, Gemini 2.5 Flash leads at 19% vs Nemotron Nano 2 at 5%.