Nemotron 3.5 Super VL vs Qwen3.8 Flash
Updated October 21, 2026. 7 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for coding: it scores 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 65.5 for Nemotron 3.5 Super VL.
Pick Nemotron 3.5 Super VL when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 1M tokens.
- Shared results
- 7
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL only
- 9
- Qwen3.8 Flash only
- 0
- Like-for-like categories
- 5 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, four public coding benchmarks
Qwen3.8 Flash
Qwen3.8 Flash scores 87.4 against 65.5.
One benchmark behind each score
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL has a AA Intelligence Index result, 26.5.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
No call
Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL has a Design Arena: websites result, 1171.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL takes 1.05M tokens against 1M.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL $0.0004, Qwen3.8 Flash $0.0004 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 65.5 from 1 benchmark, Qwen3.8 Flash 87.4 from 1 benchmark.
- Widest category
- Agentic work, 23.0 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- LiveBench browser: Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 4.0% against Qwen3.8 Flash 48.0%, 44.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL $0.50 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 1.1x apart.
- Context window
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3.8 Flash 1M.
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.
| Category | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Bars | Qwen3.8 Flash | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Agentic work | 0 | 3 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 1 | ||
| Web design | 0 | 1 | ||
| General | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 7 |
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 65.5% | 87.4% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| SciCode | 47.8% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 26.5 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here | |||
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench research | 70.9% | 74.6% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| LiveBench browser | 4.0% | 48.0% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| LiveBench long agentic | 15.8% | 37.1% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 78.8% | 87.4% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 30.7% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 17 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1171 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1148 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1108 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1132 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1155 | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL measured |
| LiveBench design | 60.7% | 72.8% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here | |||
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench data analysis | 64.6% | 74.2% | Qwen3.8 Flash |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 69.0% | Not measured | Only Nemotron 3.5 Super VL 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
| Benchmark | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.8 Flash 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.
| Specification | NVIDIA Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Qwen3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | NVIDIA | Qwen |
| Weights | Open weights | Open weights |
| Released | October 15, 2026 | August 26, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.15 | $0.15 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.50 | $0.47 |
| Coding index | 65.5 | 87.4 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 1 | 1 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Nemotron 3.5 Super VL better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?
Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for coding: it scores 87.4 on the Vibe Coding Index against 65.5 for Nemotron 3.5 Super VL. Pick Nemotron 3.5 Super VL when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 1M tokens.
Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL costs $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Nemotron 3.5 Super VL or Qwen3.8 Flash?
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks is the Nemotron 3.5 Super VL vs Qwen3.8 Flash comparison based on?
7 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Nemotron 3.5 Super VL's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and Qwen3.8 Flash's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.