Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Nemotron 3 Super

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index. Nemotron 3 Super costs 58× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

Nemotron 3 Super NVIDIA

40.1

Rank #153 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 8 categories and Nemotron 3 Super in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 64.7 to 18.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 91.1% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 15.4% for Nemotron 3 Super.
  • Nemotron 3 Super is cheaper at $0.08 / $0.45 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • Claude Opus 4.8 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Nemotron 3 Super has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8 and Nemotron 3 Super specifications
Claude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
ProviderAnthropicNVIDIA
Noometry Index60.740.1
Released2026-05-282026-03-11
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.08
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.45
Results tracked6521

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), Nemotron 3 Super: 39.4 (#158)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
SciCode53.5%36%
WeirdML82.9%38%
LMArena Coding14901403
ALE-Bench1,564213.9
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
LMArena WebDev1556—
GSO47.1%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), Nemotron 3 Super: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
APEX-Agents48.9%—
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), Nemotron 3 Super: 18.7 (#276)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%15.4%
CritPt20.9%3.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821386
ARC-AGI-272.1%—
SimpleBench64.8%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%—
ARC-AGI-192.5%—
Chess Puzzles34%—
EnigmaEval23.5%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
DTBench94.9%—
LMCA57.5%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21—
ForecastBench59.9—

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), Nemotron 3 Super: 39.6 (#101)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%60.4%
LMArena Math14871380
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%—
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%—
ProofBench69%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), Nemotron 3 Super: 38.9 (#139)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Expert15021398
GPQA Diamond91%—
SimpleQA Verified53%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), Nemotron 3 Super: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Vision1294—
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), Nemotron 3 Super: 48.4 (#144)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Non-English14501355
LMArena Chinese15071432
LMArena French14811405
LMArena German14721341
LMArena Russian14741336
LMArena Spanish14661417
LMArena Japanese1440—
LMArena Korean1432—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), Nemotron 3 Super: 71.2 (#154)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Instruction Following14761347

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), Nemotron 3 Super: 41.5 (#139)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Longer Query14831362

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), Nemotron 3 Super: 55.9 (#140)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Nemotron 3 Super
LMArena Text14611378
LMArena Creative Writing14541317
LMArena Multi-Turn14761369
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Nemotron 3 Super?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 40.1 on the Noometry Index. Nemotron 3 Super costs 58× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Nemotron 3 Super?

Nemotron 3 Super is cheaper. It lists at $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.45 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or Nemotron 3 Super better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 39.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Opus 4.8 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and Nemotron 3 Super share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and Nemotron 3 Super has 21.

Related comparisons

Go deeper