Sarvam 105B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite vs Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite comes out ahead, 83 to 54 and 52 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Sarvam AI
Sarvam 105B
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.158 / $0.632
- Context131K
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
83/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.40
- Context1.05M
NVIDIANemotron 3 Super 120B A12B
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.15 / $0.65
- Context262K
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is our pick
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (54) and Sarvam 105B (52). It leads on price, 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 priceGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite $0.175 · Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B $0.275 · Sarvam 105B $0.276 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 1,048,576 · Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B 262,144 · Sarvam 105B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 2.5 Flash-LiteSarvam 105B: Text · Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B: Text
- Self-hostingSarvam 105B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Sarvam 105B | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 73 | 82 | 73 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 100 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 25 | 61 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 52/100 | 83/100 | 54/100 |
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 | Sarvam 105BSarvam AI | Gemini 2.5 Flash-LiteGoogle | Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12BNVIDIA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.158 | $0.10 (best) | $0.15 |
| Output | $0.632 | $0.40 (best) | $0.65 |
| Cached input | $0.053 | $0.01 (best) | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.276 | $0.175 (best) | $0.275 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Sarvam AI API | Official Google API | Median of 16 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 262,144 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 65,536 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | sarvam-105b | gemini-2.5-flash-lite | — |
| API providers | 3 | 24 (best) | 18 |
| Released | Feb 18, 2026 | Jun 17, 2025 | Mar 11, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 2025 | Jun 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Sarvam 105B$2.84
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite$1.80
- Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B$2.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Sarvam 105B, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 83/100 against Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (54) and Sarvam 105B (52). It leads on price, 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, Sarvam 105B, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite or Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B costs $0.15 input / $0.65 output per million tokens (median across 16 API providers); Sarvam 105B costs $0.158 input / $0.632 output per million tokens (official Sarvam AI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.175 per million tokens for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite versus $0.275 for Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B (1.6× as much) and $0.276 for Sarvam 105B (1.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Sarvam 105B has not been scored yet, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has not been scored yet and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Sarvam 105B, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B 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?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 262,144 for Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B and 131,072 for Sarvam 105B. Maximum output per response: Sarvam 105B up to 131,072, Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite up to 65,536, Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B up to 262,144 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Sarvam 105B accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B accepts text. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Sarvam 105B and Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B is the newest, released Mar 11, 2026. Sarvam 105B came out Feb 18, 2026; Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite came out Jun 17, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Jan 2025, Nemotron 3 Super 120B A12B Jun 2025.
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 Nov 2, 2026.
