Model Comparison

MiMo-V2-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) is 1.4x cheaper per token.

Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

8 benchmarks

MiMo-V2-Flash outperforms in 7 benchmarks (Arena-Hard v2, GPQA, Humanity's Last Exam, LiveCodeBench v6, MMLU-Pro, SWE-Bench Verified, Terminal-Bench), while Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) is better at 1 benchmark (AIME 2025).

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Jun 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) costs less

For input processing, MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.10/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) ($0.06/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiMo-V2-Flash ($0.30/1M tokens) is 1.3x more expensive than Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) ($0.24/1M tokens).

In conclusion, MiMo-V2-Flash is more expensive than Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B).*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Jun 04 2026 • llm-stats.com
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerXiaomi
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.24
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

277.0B diff

MiMo-V2-Flash has 277.0B more parameters than Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B), making it 865.6% larger.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
309.0Bparameters
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)
32.0Bparameters
309.0B
MiMo-V2-Flash
32.0B
Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) accepts 262,144 input tokens compared to MiMo-V2-Flash's 256,000 tokens. Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while MiMo-V2-Flash is limited to 16,384 tokens.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
Input256,000 tokens
Output16,384 tokens
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Thu Jun 04 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2-Flash is licensed under MIT, while Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) uses NVIDIA Open Model License Agreement .

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

MiMo-V2-Flash

MIT

Open weights

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

NVIDIA Open Model License Agreement

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2-Flash was released on 2025-12-16, while Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) was released on 2025-12-15.

MiMo-V2-Flash is 0 month newer than Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B).

MiMo-V2-Flash

Dec 16, 2025

5 months ago

1d newer
Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

Dec 15, 2025

5 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-11-28, while MiMo-V2-Flash's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)'s training data extends to 2025-11-28, but cannot make a direct comparison without MiMo-V2-Flash's cutoff date.

MiMo-V2-Flash

—

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

Nov 2025

Provider Availability

MiMo-V2-Flash is available from Xiaomi. Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) is available from DeepInfra.

MiMo-V2-Flash

xiaomi logo
Xiaomi
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.06/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.24/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Xiaomi
Higher Arena-Hard v2 score (86.2% vs 67.7%)
Higher GPQA score (83.7% vs 75.0%)
Higher Humanity's Last Exam score (22.1% vs 15.5%)
Higher LiveCodeBench v6 score (80.6% vs 68.3%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (84.9% vs 78.3%)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (73.4% vs 38.8%)
Higher Terminal-Bench score (30.5% vs 8.5%)
NVIDIA
Larger context window (262,144 tokens)
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Higher AIME 2025 score (99.2% vs 94.1%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2-Flash
NVIDIA
Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2-Flash vs Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B).

Which is better, MiMo-V2-Flash or Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. MiMo-V2-Flash is made by Xiaomi and Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) is made by NVIDIA. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does MiMo-V2-Flash compare to Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) in benchmarks?

MiMo-V2-Flash scores AIME 2025: 94.1%, Arena-Hard v2: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 84.9%, HMMT 2025: 84.4%, GPQA: 83.7%. Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) scores AIME 2025: 99.2%, WMT24++: 86.2%, MMLU-Pro: 78.3%, GPQA: 75.0%, LiveCodeBench v6: 68.3%.

Is MiMo-V2-Flash cheaper than Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)?

Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) is 1.7x cheaper for input tokens. MiMo-V2-Flash costs $0.10/M input and $0.30/M output via xiaomi. Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) costs $0.06/M input and $0.24/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash supports 256K tokens and Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)?

Key differences include context window (256K vs 262K), input pricing ($0.10 vs $0.06/M), licensing (MIT vs NVIDIA Open Model License Agreement ). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiMo-V2-Flash and Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B)?

MiMo-V2-Flash is developed by Xiaomi and Nemotron 3 Nano (30B A3B) is developed by NVIDIA.