Compare/Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningvsGemma 4 12B (Reasoning)

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

NVIDIA

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning

Input
$0.075/M
Output
$0.3/M
Speed
318 tok/s
TTFT
0.54s
Google

Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)

Input
$0.1/M
Output
$0.3/M
Speed
135 tok/s
TTFT
1.26s

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
Faster (tok/s)
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
Lower Latency
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
Benchmarks (0-7)
Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)

Pricing Comparison

MetricNemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B ReasoningGemma 4 12B (Reasoning)
Input ($/M tokens)$0.075$0.1
Output ($/M tokens)$0.3$0.3
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning$0.10
Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)$0.13

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
318 tok/s
Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)
135 tok/s
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning
0.54s
Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)
1.26s

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) takes the aggregate benchmark matchup 7–0 across 7 categories. Real workloads usually care about a handful of specific tasks — see the per-benchmark table above.

Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is strongest on IFBench (63%), GPQA Diamond (47%), SciCode (28%). Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) leads on GPQA Diamond (75%), IFBench (74%), SciCode (38%).

Speed. On throughput, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning generates tokens at 318 tok/s versus 135 tok/s — about 58% faster. On time-to-first-token, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning responds in 543ms vs 1260ms, which matters most for chat-style UIs.

Provider. NVIDIA and Google sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: NVIDIA tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Google often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning costs $6.75 ($81/year); Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) costs $7.50 ($90/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning ≈ $0.97/run, Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) ≈ $1.10/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning ≈ $45/run, Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) ≈ $50/run. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

Recommendation. If you want one safe default, take Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) — it dominates the benchmark table and the latency profile is 2.4× faster. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning only makes sense when you specifically need its pricing tier, an existing contract, or a feature difference that is not measured by the benchmarks above.

Head-to-head deltas

  • Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) wins 7 more benchmarks than its opponent — a margin wide enough to call the comparison settled on benchmark terms alone.
  • On throughput, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is 2.36× faster (318 tok/s vs 135 tok/s). For streaming chat or real-time agents this alone often flips the recommendation.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
14.921.8
Coding Index
13.831.0
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
46.9%75.3%
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
5.3%14.8%
SciCode
27.8%38.2%
IFBench
63.2%73.5%
TerminalBench
8.3%18.2%
Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning0 wins
7 winsGemma 4 12B (Reasoning)

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning or Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.13/M tokens vs $0.15/M for Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning).

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) wins 7 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning generates tokens faster at 318 tok/s vs 135 tok/s. Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning also has lower time-to-first-token (0.54s vs 1.26s).

When should I use Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning vs Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning)?

Choose based on your priorities: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning for lower cost, Gemma 4 12B (Reasoning) for stronger benchmark performance, and Nemotron 3 Nano Omni 30B A3B Reasoning for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.