Laguna XS 2.1 vs Qwen3.5 Flash vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
Qwen3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 71 and 68 on our weighted score, though Laguna XS 2.1 is 2.3× cheaper per token.
PoolsideLaguna XS 2.1
68/100- ECI—
- Price$0.06 / $0.12
- Context262K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 Flash
79/100- ECI144.0
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context1M
NVIDIANemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
71/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.20
- Context262K
Qwen3.5 Flash is our pick
Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B (71) and Laguna XS 2.1 (68). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceLaguna XS 2.1Laguna XS 2.1 $0.075 · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B $0.087 · Qwen3.5 Flash $0.175 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · Laguna XS 2.1 262,144 · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3.5 FlashLaguna XS 2.1: Text · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video · Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B: Text
- Self-hostingLaguna XS 2.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Laguna XS 2.1 | Qwen3.5 Flash | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 86 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 80 | 45 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 60 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 68/100 | 79/100 | 71/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Laguna XS 2.1Poolside | Qwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen) | Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 144.0 | — |
| ECI rank | — | #82 of 148 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 82.3% | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 18.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 84.4% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 20.3% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.06 | $0.10 | $0.05 (best) |
| Output | $0.12 (best) | $0.40 | $0.20 |
| Cached input | — | $0.01 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.075 (best) | $0.175 | $0.087 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Alibaba API | Median of 9 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 65,536 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | poolside/laguna-xs-2.1 | qwen3.5-flash | nvidia/nemotron-3.5-lightning-30b-a3b |
| API providers | 4 | 8 | 12 (best) |
| Released | Jul 2, 2026 | Feb 23, 2026 | Aug 11, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Laguna XS 2.1$0.84
- Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B$0.90
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Laguna XS 2.1, Qwen3.5 Flash or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?
Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B (71) and Laguna XS 2.1 (68). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Laguna XS 2.1, Qwen3.5 Flash or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B?
Laguna XS 2.1 is cheaper at $0.06 input / $0.12 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider; free on Poolside). Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B costs $0.05 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 9 API providers; free on Nvidia); Qwen3.5 Flash costs $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.075 per million tokens for Laguna XS 2.1 versus $0.087 for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B (1.2× as much) and $0.175 for Qwen3.5 Flash (2.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Laguna XS 2.1 has not been scored yet, Qwen3.5 Flash has an ECI of 144.0 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Laguna XS 2.1, Qwen3.5 Flash and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Laguna XS 2.1 and 262,144 for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B. Maximum output per response: Laguna XS 2.1 up to 32,768, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Laguna XS 2.1 accepts text; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B accepts text. Qwen3.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Laguna XS 2.1 and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen3.5 Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B is the newest, released Aug 11, 2026. Laguna XS 2.1 came out Jul 2, 2026; Qwen3.5 Flash came out Feb 23, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
