Compare AI models: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017DeepSeekHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
- Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3BNVIDIAHollow points use fallbacks · hover for details
ReasoningCodingCost efficiencyContext windowMultimodalTool use
| Model | Reasoning | Coding | Cost efficiency | Context window | Multimodal | Tool use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 | 56/100 | 100/100 | 59/100 | 81/100 | 33/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
| Nemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B | 0/100 | 34/100 | 86/100 | 63/100 | 0/100 | 50/100 — Tool calling supported; no comparable benchmark |
Overview
Author
Context length
1M
262K
Reasoning
True
True
Input modalities
Text, Image
Text
Output modalities
Text
Text
Providers
Pricing
Input
$0.30/ 1M
$0.05/ 1M
Output
$1.20/ 1M
$0.20/ 1M
Cached input
$0.006/ 1M
$0.01/ 1M
MomentumLast 2 mo
Unique users
No usage
266K
Completed sessions
No usage
7,072,217
Token share
No usage
0.44%
Tokens
No usage
4.5T+245%
No trend data
AUG 24OCT 18
RetentionWeek 1
Returning users
Pending
Pending
Related comparisons. Other model pairs to check.
Nearby alternativeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Jamba MiniDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017·Jamba MiniNearby alternativeNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Jamba MiniNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B·Jamba MiniRelated comparisonDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Jamba LargeDeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017·Jamba LargeRelated comparisonNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B vs Jamba LargeNemotron 3.5 Lightning 30B A3B·Jamba Large