Claude Sonnet 4 vs NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Claude Sonnet 4 is the stronger all-rounder.NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 is cheaper.
Scores updated · 19 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking20Claude Sonnet 42 of 3 tests · 1 tie
- CodingWriting and fixing software20Claude Sonnet 42 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up20Claude Sonnet 42 of 2 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own10Claude Sonnet 41 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Sonnet 41 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Sonnet 41 of 1 test
Agents, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 costs 99% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Sonnet 4 pulls ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+47.6points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+31.4points ahead
- Hard command-line tasks in a real terminalTerminal-Bench Hard+29.6points ahead
Where NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 19 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Sonnet 4
- Terminal-Bench HardClaude Sonnet 4 by 29.631.11.5+29.6
- SciCodeClaude Sonnet 4 by 184022+18
ReasoningClaude Sonnet 4
- GPQA DiamondClaude Sonnet 4 by 20.777.757+20.7
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Sonnet 4 by 5.810.74.9+5.8
- CritPttie0.30tie
FactsClaude Sonnet 4
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Sonnet 4 by 31.470.939.5+31.4
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Sonnet 4 by 10.922.711.8+10.9
Following instructionsClaude Sonnet 4
- IFBenchClaude Sonnet 4 by 27.154.727.6+27.1
Other results9 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Claude Sonnet 4 by 42.764.621.9+42.7
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Sonnet 4 by 41.70.2-41.5+41.7
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Sonnet 4 by 29.337.68.3+29.3
- AA IntelligenceClaude Sonnet 4 by 11.518.97.4+11.5
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Sonnet 4 by 8.217.69.4+8.2
- MATH-500 (EM)NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 by 3.89497.8+3.8
- IFEvalNVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 by 2.787.690.3+2.7
- LiveCodeBenchNVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 by 2.668.571.1+2.6
- AIME 2025NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 by 1.670.572.1+1.6
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Sonnet 4 or NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2?
Claude Sonnet 4 wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, long documents and following instructions. NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 wins none, but costs 99% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 4. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Sonnet 4 costs $3.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 per million output tokens; NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 costs $0.04 and $0.16. That makes NVIDIA Nemotron Nano 9B V2 about 99% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 19 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 10 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.