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. | 30B | — |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 1M | — |
| 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. | — | $1.10 |
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. | — | $4.40 |
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. | — | $0.55 |
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. | $0.025Darkbloom | $1.10OpenAI |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.12Darkbloom | $4.40OpenAI |
| $11.00Darkbloom · int4 | $440OpenAI list price | |
| Benchmarks | ||
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. | 51.6% | 49.3% |
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% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | NVIDIA | OpenAI |
| Release date | Aug 11 2026 | Jan 31 2025 |
| Access | Open Source | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Nemotron 3.5 LightningvsClaude Haiku 5.5o3-minivsClaude Haiku 5.5Nemotron 3.5 LightningvsGemini 4 Argono3-minivsGemini 4 ArgonNemotron 3.5 LightningvsMuse Spark Openo3-minivsMuse Spark OpenNemotron 3.5 LightningvsGrok 4.7o3-minivsGrok 4.7Nemotron 3.5 LightningvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flasho3-minivsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashNemotron 3.5 LightningvsMistral Large 4o3-minivsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads o3-mini on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (SWE-Bench Verified). Only o3-mini has a verified first-party API price: $1.10 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning. o3-mini shipped 557 days before Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is open source, while o3-mini is closed.
On SWE-Bench Verified, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads at 51.6% vs o3-mini at 49.3%.