Gemini 4 Carbon (Low) vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Which is better for the money: Gemini 4 Carbon (Low) by Google or Nemotron 3.5 Super VL by NVIDIA? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-04.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 4 Carbon (Low) scores 40.6 points higher (54.2 vs 13.6) but costs 12× as much to run the benchmark ($5725 vs $463; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 4 Carbon (Low) when you need intelligence above 13.6, and Nemotron 3.5 Super VL when 13.6 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 4 Carbon (Low) | Nemotron 3.5 Super VL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 54.2 | 13.6 | −74.9% Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is 74.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,725.02 | $462.70 | −91.9% Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is 91.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.28s | 6.52s | −60.0% Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is 60.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.20 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
Nemotron 3.5 Super VL vs Gemini 4 Carbon (Low): 74.9% less intelligence, 91.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 60.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 4 Carbon (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 57.40 for $4766.
- Nemotron 3.5 Super VL is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 46.30 for $389.
Gemini 4 Carbon (Low)Nemotron 3.5 Super VLToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/gemini-4-carbon-low/nemotron-3-5-super-vl · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-4-carbon-low/nemotron-3-5-super-vl?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill