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 · base tier | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | $1.25 | — |
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. | $10.00 | — |
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. | $0.125 | — |
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. | $0.625Google AI Studio | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $5.00Google AI Studio | — |
| $750Google list price | — | |
| Benchmarks | ||
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 86.4% | 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. | 20% | — |
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. | 59.6% | — |
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% |
Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsMultidisciplinary reasoning — Humanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 18.8% | — |
MMMUMultimodal — Tests the AI on understanding images and text together across many college subjects. Higher is better. | 68% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | NVIDIA | |
| Release date | Mar 25 2025 | Oct 15 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Gemini 2.5 ProvsClaude Haiku 5.5Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsClaude Haiku 5.5Gemini 2.5 ProvsGPT-6.1 SolNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsGPT-6.1 SolGemini 2.5 ProvsMuse Spark OpenNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsMuse Spark OpenGemini 2.5 ProvsGrok 4.7Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsGrok 4.7Gemini 2.5 ProvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashNemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGemini 2.5 ProvsMistral Large 4Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74BvsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B leads Gemini 2.5 Pro on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (GPQA Diamond). Only Gemini 2.5 Pro has a verified first-party API price: $1.25 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B. Gemini 2.5 Pro shipped 569 days before Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Gemini 2.5 Pro is closed, while Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B is open weight.
On GPQA Diamond, Nemotron 3.5 Bolt 74B leads at 86.43% vs Gemini 2.5 Pro at 86.4%.