RankingEffort benchmarks
NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3B-BF16 effort benchmarks
Compare measured Low, Medium, High and other settings. Every number keeps its source.
NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3B-BF16
16 measured results · 1 reported effort labels · 16 benchmark/harness combinations. Model evidence and sources →
Capability score evidence
NVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3B-BF16 · Reasoning: 5.2 overall comparison score. Meets the overall evidence requirements.
Which sources carry the weight?
- Artificial Analysis · 100.0% direct comparison weight · independent
These shares describe the comparisons entering the fit, not fractions of the final score.
How sensitive is this score?
Remove one evaluator or family and refit the graph against the same overall panel. Values use the matching dataset audited 2026-09-12. These are sensitivity checks, not confidence intervals; ranking eligibility may also change.
| Removed evidence | Recomputed score | Change |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis | Comparison path lost | — |
| ARC Prize | 6.2 | +1.0 |
| Datacurve | 4.5 | -0.8 |
| LiveCodeBench | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| Scale | 5.8 | +0.6 |
| Terminal-Bench | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| Cognition | 5.5 | +0.2 |
| LiveBench | 5.4 | +0.1 |
| SWE-rebench | 5.4 | +0.1 |
| Epoch AI | 5.4 | +0.1 |
| Vals AI | 5.1 | -0.1 |
| Provider reports · Anthropic | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| Provider reports · Moonshot AI | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| Provider reports · Meta | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| Provider reports · Mistral | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| All provider reports | 5.2 | -0.0 |
Every benchmark family
| Removed evidence | Recomputed score | Change |
|---|---|---|
| arc-agi | 6.2 | +1.0 |
| deepswe | 4.5 | -0.8 |
| omniscience | 5.8 | +0.5 |
| critpt | 5.7 | +0.5 |
| mmmu-pro | 5.6 | +0.3 |
| scicode | 5.5 | +0.3 |
| gdpval | 5.0 | -0.3 |
| briefcase | 5.0 | -0.2 |
| gpqa | 5.0 | -0.2 |
| epoch-game-puzzles | 5.0 | -0.2 |
| frontiercode | 5.5 | +0.2 |
| simpleqa | 5.4 | +0.2 |
| terminal-bench | 5.0 | -0.2 |
| ifbench | 5.1 | -0.2 |
| aa-lcr | 5.1 | -0.2 |
| mmlu-pro | 5.4 | +0.2 |
| tau-bench | 5.1 | -0.2 |
| automationbench | 5.4 | +0.1 |
| swe-rebench | 5.4 | +0.1 |
| gdp-pdf | 5.1 | -0.1 |
| hle | 5.3 | +0.1 |
| multi-swe-bench | 5.2 | -0.1 |
| enterprise-ops | 5.3 | +0.1 |
| livebench-instructions | 5.3 | +0.1 |
| harvey | 5.2 | -0.1 |
| livebench-language | 5.3 | +0.1 |
| apex-agents | 5.3 | +0.1 |
| swe-atlas-qna | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| frontiermath | 5.3 | +0.0 |
| livebench-coding | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| gmmlu | 5.3 | +0.0 |
| vibe-code | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| livebench-reasoning | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| arc-agi-3 | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| math500 | 5.3 | +0.0 |
| vals-finance-agent | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| vals-legal-research | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| swe-atlas-test-writing | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| vals-code-migration | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| itbench | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| aime | 5.3 | +0.0 |
| analyst-agent | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| livebench-data | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| livebench-math | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| vals-excel-modeling | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| swe-atlas-refactoring | 5.2 | -0.0 |
| enigma-eval | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| swe-bench-pro | 5.2 | +0.0 |
| livecodebench | 5.2 | -0.0 |
What evidence is missing from the fit?
Across all collected settings for this model: 16 observations, 15 contributing, 0 matched without graph weight and 1 excluded. Counts do not establish rank eligibility.
- 1 · Benchmark family or source protocol has not been reviewed
Capability profile
One configuration, seven capabilities
- ANVIDIA-Nemotron-3.5-Lightning-30B-A3B-BF16 · Reasoning3 of 7 capabilities supported
Gaps are unknown, not zero. Hollow points are preliminary.
Agentic
A8.9SupportedHard reasoning
A5.8SupportedCoding
A5.8SupportedHuman pref
UnknownKnowledge
A2.7PreliminaryMultimodal
UnknownLong context
A10.7Preliminary
Each profile belongs to the named configuration. Capability scores use a shared panel for all axes, distinct from the overall ranking panel; they are not accuracy percentages or direct head-to-head wins.
Compare this configuration →Explore the model evidence profile →
| Benchmark / source | Reasoning |
|---|---|
AA-Briefcase EloBenchmark detailsAA-Briefcase is an agentic knowledge work benchmark developed by Artificial Analysis. AA-Briefcase Elo is a combined metric that aggregates rubric pass rate, analytical quality Elo and presentation Elo · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: elo. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 508.5 Elo Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
AA-LCR v1.1Benchmark detailsIndependently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 60.33% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
AutomationBench-AABenchmark detailsShare of task objectives completed with no guardrail violations · Higher is better · Benchmark developed by Zapier · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 0.84% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
CritPtBenchmark detailsBenchmark developed by Argonne and UIUC, with contributions from 60+ researchers globally · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 0% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
EnterpriseOps-Gym-AABenchmark detailsOverall task success rate across all eight enterprise domains (oracle tool mode) · Benchmark developed by ServiceNow Research · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 18.35% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
GDP.pdf: All-passBenchmark detailsShare of attempts where every atomic criterion passed · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 3% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
GDPval-AA v2 LeaderboardBenchmark detailsElo rating for performance on real-world work tasks · Anchored to a human baseline of 1,000 · Higher is better · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: elo. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 766.89 Elo Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
GPQA DiamondBenchmark detailsIndependently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 74.34% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
Humanity's Last ExamBenchmark detailsIndependently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 10.57% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
MLCR-AABenchmark detailsShare of tasks judged accurate, complete, and concise · Expert + compound (hard) sets · Benchmark developed by Wisedocs · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 1.11% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
AA-Omniscience IndexBenchmark detailsAA-Omniscience Index (higher is better) measures knowledge reliability and hallucination. It rewards correct answers, penalizes hallucinations, and has no penalty for refusing to answer. Scores range from -100 to 100, where 0 means as many correct as incorrect answers, and negative scores mean more incorrect than correct. · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: index. Source collected 2026-09-12. | -17.72 Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
AA-Omniscience AccuracyBenchmark detailsAA-Omniscience Accuracy (higher is better) measures the proportion of correctly answered questions out of all questions, regardless of whether the model chooses to answer · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 14.43% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
SciCodeBenchmark detailsIndependently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 32.06% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
𝜏³-BankingBenchmark detailsBenchmark developed by Sierra Research · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 8.87% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
Terminal-Bench v2.1Benchmark detailsBenchmark developed by the Laude Institute and open-source contributors · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 24.34% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
Terminal-Bench v4.0Benchmark detailsBenchmark developed by the Laude Institute, Stanford, and open-source contributors · Independently benchmarked by Artificial Analysis · Evaluation results measured independently by Artificial Analysis Unit: percent. Source collected 2026-09-12. | 0.51% Reported settingsNemotron 3.5 Lightning; Reported effort: reasoning; Model source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/nemotron-3-5-lightning; Mode from evaluator isReasoning metadata; effort budget not specified |
What these comparisons mean
Each source reports its own effort labels. Matching labels do not establish equal compute budgets or identical fallback behavior. Open Reported settings to inspect the exact model name, agent and task coverage. Multiple results at one level remain visible rather than selecting the best. Source-reported None or Non-reasoning labels are not treated as evidence that an API supports those settings.
These measurements use their own dated source collection. The leaderboard fits identified configurations jointly; it contains no pooled model ratings. Explicit thinking budgets are separate configurations. Read the methodology.
Download all effort benchmark results · 7,424 results across 240 models · Collected 2026-09-12