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. | 550B | — |
| 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. | $0.50DeepInfra | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $2.20DeepInfra | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
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. | 56.4% | 73% |
SWE-Bench ProAgentic coding — Can the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | — | 54% |
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. | 71.9% | — |
SWE-Bench MultilingualMultilingual coding — Like SWE-Bench, but the coding problems span many programming languages, not just one. Tests how broadly the AI can code. Higher is better. | — | 79.8% |
DeepSWE 1.0Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. Higher is better. | — | 18% |
Next.js EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | — | 81% |
Terminal-Bench 2.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? (Version 2.0 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 69.3% |
BrowseCompWeb browsing — Can the AI browse the web and track down hard-to-find answers? Higher is better. | 44.4% | — |
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. | 26.7% | — |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 86.7% | — |
AA Intelligence IndexOverall intelligence — Artificial Analysis composite intelligence index across evals | 48 | — |
threejsevalCommunity preference (Three.js) — Every model gets the same prompt — "the Eiffel Tower", "a glass fishbowl", "a robot arm picking toys into a box" — and builds a 3D scene in Three.js. Real people then see two scenes side by side, names hidden, and vote for the one they prefer. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on threejseval.com, averaged across all the prompts. It measures whether the scene looks and moves right to a human eye, not whether the code passes a test. Higher is better. | — | 1106 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | NVIDIA | SpaceXAI |
| Release date | Jun 4 2026 | May 18 2026 |
| Access | Open Source | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Nemotron 3 UltravsClaude Opus 5.5Composer 2.5vsClaude Opus 5.5Nemotron 3 UltravsGPT-6 SolComposer 2.5vsGPT-6 SolNemotron 3 UltravsGemini 3.8 FlashComposer 2.5vsGemini 3.8 FlashNemotron 3 UltravsMuse Spark 1.3Composer 2.5vsMuse Spark 1.3Nemotron 3 UltravsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashComposer 2.5vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashNemotron 3 UltravsMistral Medium 3.5Composer 2.5vsMistral Medium 3.5Frequently asked questions
Composer 2.5 leads Nemotron 3 Ultra on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Terminal-Bench 2.1). Composer 2.5 shipped 17 days before Nemotron 3 Ultra, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Nemotron 3 Ultra is open source, while Composer 2.5 is closed.
On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Composer 2.5 leads at 73% vs Nemotron 3 Ultra at 56.4%.