Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Solar Pro 3

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning leads Solar Pro 3 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.9 to 7.8, and Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 4.1x less per output token ($0.147 vs $0.60 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 7 benchmarks have a result for both.

Nemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIA
Coding
22.6
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.147
7
Solar Pro 3Upstage
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.60
0
vs boards won of 7 shared

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Solar Pro 3: which to pick

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Solar Pro 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Shared results
7
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only
13
Solar Pro 3 only
3
Like-for-like categories
5 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
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 22.6 from 2 benchmarks, Solar Pro 3 not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 28.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 60.3% against Solar Pro 3 32.3%, 28.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning $0.147 against Solar Pro 3 $0.60 per million output tokens, 4.1x apart.
Context window
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning takes 262K tokens, Solar Pro 3 131K.

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
CategoryNemotron 3.5 LightningBarsSolar Pro 3Ties
Coding20
Intelligence10
Agentic work10
Reasoning20
General10
All shared boards70
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
AA Coding Index26.816.2Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)52.8%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Code migration (Vals AI)3.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)10.9%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)29.5%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
SciCode32.1%25.5%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured7.6%Only Solar Pro 3 measured
ALE-Bench769.2Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
AA Intelligence Index12.97.8Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
AA Agentic Index3.51.4Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Finance Agent (Vals AI)18.5%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)2.6%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)2.9%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)17.0%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured86.3%Only Solar Pro 3 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 35 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)74.3%72.4%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)10.6%10.3%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 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
Neither model has a result on 13 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
CorpFin (Vals AI)54.2%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)4.3%Not measuredOnly Nemotron 3.5 Lightning measured
IFBenchNot measured71.2%Only Solar Pro 3 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)60.3%32.3%Nemotron 3.5 Lightning
Neither model has a result on the other 43 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
BenchmarkNemotron 3.5 LightningSolar Pro 3Leader
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

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0001Fits in one request
Solar Pro 3$0.0004Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.0031Fits in one request
Solar Pro 3$0.0093Fits in one request

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning$0.012Fits in one request
Solar Pro 3$0.036Exceeds the context window

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 Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Solar Pro 3
SpecificationNVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 LightningUpstage Solar Pro 3
MakerNVIDIAUpstage
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedAugust 11, 2026January 27, 2026
Context window262K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.0534$0.15
Output $/Mtok$0.147$0.60
Coding index22.6Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it20
Cost per solved task$0.06Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning better than Solar Pro 3 for coding?

Only Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has a coding score, 22.6 on the Vibe Coding Index; Solar Pro 3 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Solar Pro 3?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs $0.0534 per million input tokens and $0.147 per million output tokens; Solar Pro 3 costs $0.15 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning only.

Which has the bigger context window, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Solar Pro 3?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning, with 262K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Solar Pro 3 comparison based on?

7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Solar Pro 3's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next