Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Saba vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads Saba on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.9 to 6.5, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 4.1x less per output token ($0.147 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

SabaMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
Nemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIA
Coding
22.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.147
3
vs boards won of 3 shared

Saba or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: which to pick

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Saba has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
3
Saba only
1
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
17
Like-for-like categories
2 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
Saba not benchmarked, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 19.1 points apart on average over 2 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): Saba 42.4% against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 74.3%, 31.9 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Saba $0.60 against Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 per million output tokens, 4.1x apart.
Context window
Saba takes 33K tokens, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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
CategorySabaBarsNemotron 3.5 LightningTies
Intelligence01
Reasoning02
All shared boards03
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index9 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Coding IndexNot measured26.8Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured52.8%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured3.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured10.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured29.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
SciCodeNot measured32.1%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ALE-BenchNot measured769.2Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Intelligence Index6.512.9Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured3.5Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured18.5%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.6%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured2.9%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured17.0%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Reasoning benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%74.3%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.3%10.6%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Neither model has a result on the other 20 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
Neither model has a result on 13 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
CorpFin (Vals AI)Not measured54.2%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)61.1%Not measuredOnly Saba measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured4.3%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured60.3%Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Neither model has a result on the other 44 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
BenchmarkSabaNemotron 3.5 LightningLeader
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

Saba$0.0005Fits in one request
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0001Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Saba$0.012Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0031Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Saba$0.046Exceeds the context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.012Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 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 Saba and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
SpecificationMistral SabaNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
MakerMistral AINVIDIA
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedFebruary 17, 2025August 11, 2026
Context window33K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.0534
Output $/Mtok$0.60$0.147
Coding indexNot benchmarked22.6
Independent measurements behind it02
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.06
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Saba better than Nemotron 3.5 Lightning for coding?

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Saba has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Saba or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

Saba costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $0.60 per million output tokens; Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 and $0.147. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.

Which has the bigger context window, Saba or Nemotron 3.5 Lightning?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the Saba vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Saba's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next