ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Step 3.7 Flash

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning comes out ahead, 69 to 62 and 53 on our weighted score, though MiniCPM5-2B is 30% cheaper per token.

  1. OpenBMB

    MiniCPM5-2B

    Released Sep 6, 2026

    53/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.124 / $0.743
    • Context131K
  2. Our pick

    NVIDIA

    Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning

    Released Apr 28, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.25 / $0.85
    • Context256K
  3. StepFun

    Step 3.7 Flash

    Released May 29, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.185 / $1.11
    • Context256K
01 — Verdict

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is our pick

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Step 3.7 Flash (62) and MiniCPM5-2B (53). It leads on inputs & features. MiniCPM5-2B wins on price. 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 priceMiniCPM5-2BMiniCPM5-2B $0.279 · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning $0.40 · Step 3.7 Flash $0.416 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning and Step 3.7 FlashNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning 256,000 · Step 3.7 Flash 256,000 · MiniCPM5-2B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningMiniCPM5-2B: Text · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Step 3.7 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiniCPM5-2BNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningStep 3.7 Flash
Price50%766968
Inputs & features30%359070
Context window20%243636
Overall100%53/10069/10062/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

MiniCPM5-2B vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Step 3.7 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationMiniCPM5-2BOpenBMBNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNVIDIAStep 3.7 FlashStepFun
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.124 (best)$0.25$0.185
Output$0.743 (best)$0.85$1.11
Cached input——$0.037
Blended (3:1)$0.279 (best)$0.40$0.416
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 4 providersOfficial StepFun (Global) API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)256,000 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens65,536 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesYeslow · medium · high
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenapache-2.0OpenOpen
API model ID—nvidia/nemotron-3-nano-omni-30b-a3b-reasoningstep-3.7-flash
API providers1818 (best)
ReleasedSep 6, 2026Apr 28, 2026May 29, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——Mar 1, 2026
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • MiniCPM5-2B$2.73
  • Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning$4.20
  • Step 3.7 Flash$4.07
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiniCPM5-2B, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Step 3.7 Flash?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Step 3.7 Flash (62) and MiniCPM5-2B (53). It leads on inputs & features. MiniCPM5-2B wins on price. 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, MiniCPM5-2B, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Step 3.7 Flash?

MiniCPM5-2B is cheaper at $0.124 input / $0.743 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning costs $0.25 input / $0.85 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers; free on Nvidia); Step 3.7 Flash costs $0.185 input / $1.11 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.279 per million tokens for MiniCPM5-2B versus $0.40 for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning (1.4× as much) and $0.416 for Step 3.7 Flash (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiniCPM5-2B has not been scored yet, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning has not been scored yet and Step 3.7 Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiniCPM5-2B, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning and Step 3.7 Flash 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?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning and Step 3.7 Flash have the largest context windows (256,000 and 256,000 tokens), against 131,072 for MiniCPM5-2B. Maximum output per response: MiniCPM5-2B up to 131,072, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning up to 65,536, Step 3.7 Flash up to 256,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiniCPM5-2B accepts text; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning accepts text, images, audio and video; Step 3.7 Flash accepts text, images and video. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, all three publish their weights (apache-2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

MiniCPM5-2B is the newest, released Sep 6, 2026. Step 3.7 Flash came out May 29, 2026; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning came out Apr 28, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Step 3.7 Flash Mar 1, 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.