Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B

Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B leads Llama 3.2 3B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 8.9 to 5.7, and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B costs 1.5x less per output token ($0.22 vs $0.3325 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 33 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace Llama 3.2 3B Instruct Replace Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Llama 3.2 3B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.3325
0
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BNVIDIA
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.22
33
vs boards won of 33 shared

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct or Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Model ALlama 3.2 3B InstructMeta LlamaNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BNVIDIANot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
33
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct only
2
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B only
9
Like-for-like categories
7 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct not benchmarked, Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Math, 64.3 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
AA Math Index: Llama 3.2 3B Instruct 3.3 against Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B 91.0, 87.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct $0.3325 against Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B $0.22 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
Llama 3.2 3B Instruct takes 131K tokens, Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryLlama 3.2 3B InstructBarsNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BTies
Coding03
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning05
Math04
Knowledge05
General014
All shared boards033
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index03
Coding benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured14.4Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)8.3%74.1%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
SciCodeNot measured30.6%Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured13.6%Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: coding10981378Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: software and IT11031383Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
AA Intelligence Index5.78.9Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.0Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
τ²-Bench Telecom21.1%40.9%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BALROG10.1%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)21.9%Not measuredOnly Llama 3.2 3B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Reasoning benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)25.5%75.7%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)5.3%11.4%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: hard prompts10951348Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: expert10901355Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English11411376Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Math benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
AA Math Index3.391.0Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)3.3%91.0%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: math11261371Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: mathematical work11281375Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Knowledge benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)34.7%79.4%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: science11061353Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare11041349Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: legal and government11151341Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: business and finance10741346Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index014
General benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
IFBench26.2%71.1%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)4.3%38.0%Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text11101348Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: instruction following10891303Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: creative writing10941269Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: English11801377Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: non-English10191320Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: Chinese10171383Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: German10561348Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1268Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1269Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1396Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1376Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: Russian9491304Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1303Only Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn11051319Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: longer queries11001300Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: writing and language10961283Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media10831293Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
BenchmarkLlama 3.2 3B InstructNemotron 3 Nano 30B A3BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0002Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B$0.0002Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.0035Fits in one request
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B$0.0034Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct$0.013Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B$0.013Fits in one request

Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Llama 3.2 3B Instruct and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
SpecificationMeta Llama 3.2 3B InstructNVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B
MakerMeta LlamaNVIDIA
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedSeptember 25, 2024December 14, 2025
Context window131K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.0505$0.055
Output $/Mtok$0.3325$0.22
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Llama 3.2 3B Instruct better than Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Llama 3.2 3B Instruct for work measured by LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or LMArena Text: coding, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct or Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B?

Llama 3.2 3B Instruct costs $0.0505 per million input tokens and $0.3325 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B costs $0.055 and $0.22. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Llama 3.2 3B Instruct or Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B?

Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Llama 3.2 3B Instruct vs Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B comparison based on?

33 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Llama 3.2 3B Instruct's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next