Model comparison
Ling 2.6 Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B
Head-to-head evidence from 17 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Ling 2.6 Flash #154 (Estimated); Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B #151 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Ling 2.6 Flash and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B share 17 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Ling 2.6 Flash; 12 to Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 17
- Ling 2.6 Flash only
- 1
- Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B only
- 12
- Comparable categories
- 3 / 8
Pick Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Ling 2.6 Flash only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 17 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 44.24 versus 43.87. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 76.3 against 59. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFBench, 57% to 74.2%.
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is the reasoning model in the pair, while Ling 2.6 Flash is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Ling 2.6 Flash gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Ling 2.6 Flash | Δ | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Ling 2.6 Flash59.0 | Margin→ 17.3 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
| Inst. Following | Ling 2.6 Flash57.0 | Margin→ 17.2 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B74.2 |
| Coding | Ling 2.6 Flash27.0 | Margin→ 5.0 | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B32.0 |
| Multimodal | Ling 2.6 FlashNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B76.3 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
IFBench
Inst. FollowingA 57%B 74.2%Winner: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BΔ 17.2IFBench: Ling 2.6 Flash scored 57%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 74.2%. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 59%B 72.2%Winner: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BΔ 13.2GPQA: Ling 2.6 Flash scored 59%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 72.2%. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SciCode
CodingA 27%B 32%Winner: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BΔ 5SciCode: Ling 2.6 Flash scored 27%; Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B scored 32%. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Ling 2.6 Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Ling 2.6 FlashNot available | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B$0 input / $0 output | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Ling 2.6 Flash209.5 tok/s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Ling 2.6 Flash1.07 s | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Ling 2.6 Flash262K | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B256K | Ling 2.6 Flash lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic5 benchmarks
CodingNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
KnowledgeNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B wins9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Ling 2.6 Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 14.1% | 14.9% | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads |
| GPQASource | 59% | 72.2% | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 59.3% | 46.9% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-HLESource | 6.2% | 5.3% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -65.7% | -56.0% | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 15.4% | 14.8% | Ling 2.6 Flash leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 95.8% | 83.1% | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B leads |
| MMLU-ProSource | — | 77.3% | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Ling 2.6 Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME 2025Source | — | 82.1% | Not comparable |
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Ling 2.6 Flash | Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMUSource | — | 70.8% | Not comparable |
| MMLongBench-DocSource | — | 57.5% | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | — | 76.3% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 57.8% | Not comparable |
| Video-MME (w/o subtitle)Source | — | 72.2% | Not comparable |
| AI2D_TESTSource | — | 88.5% | Not comparable |
| RefCOCO (avg)Source | — | 90.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 53.2% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (4)
Which is better, Ling 2.6 Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 44.24 to 43.87. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFBench, where the scores are 57% and 74.2%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Ling 2.6 Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 76.3 versus 59. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Ling 2.6 Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 32 versus 27. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for instruction following, Ling 2.6 Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B?
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 74.2 versus 57. Inside this category, IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.