ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Opus 5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning comes out ahead, 69 to 37 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Opus 5

    Released Jul 24, 2026

    37/100
    • ECI162.9
    • Price$5.00 / $25.00
    • Context1M
  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. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

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 Claude Opus 5 (37). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Opus 5 wins on 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 priceNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning $0.40 · Claude Opus 5 $10.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextClaude Opus 5Claude Opus 5 1,000,000 · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning 256,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningClaude Opus 5: Text, Images, PDFs · Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning: Text, Images, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Opus 5Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
Price50%269
Inputs & features30%8090
Context window20%6036
Overall100%37/10069/100

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.

Claude Opus 5 vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Opus 5AnthropicNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningNVIDIA
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)162.9—
ECI rank#5 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions93.9%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics85.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics98.9%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions59.9%—
Price per million tokens
Input$5.00$0.25 (best)
Output$25.00$0.85 (best)
Cached input$0.50—
Blended (3:1)$10.00$0.40 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIMedian of 4 providers
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens (best)256,000 tokens
Max output128,000 tokens (best)65,536 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · maxYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDclaude-opus-5nvidia/nemotron-3-nano-omni-30b-a3b-reasoning
API providers35 (best)8
ReleasedJul 24, 2026Apr 28, 2026
Knowledge cutoffMay 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.

  • Claude Opus 5$100.00
  • Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning$4.20
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Opus 5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Claude Opus 5 (37). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Opus 5 wins on 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, Claude Opus 5 or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is cheaper at $0.25 input / $0.85 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers; free on Nvidia). Claude Opus 5 costs $5.00 input / $25.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.40 per million tokens for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning versus $10.00 for Claude Opus 5 (25× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Claude Opus 5 has an ECI of 162.9 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Opus 5 and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 5 has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 256,000 for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning. Maximum output per response: Claude Opus 5 up to 128,000, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Opus 5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning accepts text, images, audio and video. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Opus 5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Claude Opus 5 is the newest, released Jul 24, 2026. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning came out Apr 28, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 5 May 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.