Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning (NVIDIA) and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (Qwen) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 23 September 2026

As of 23 September 2026, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#91 vs #94); Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is 20× cheaper per output token ($0.20/1M vs $4.00/1M); Nemotron 3.5 Lightning offers the longer context window (262K vs 131K tokens); and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking ships open weights.

Which should you choose?

Choose Nemotron 3.5 Lightning if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #91 against #94 (56.0 vs 55.3 points).
  • API cost matters — $0.20/1M output tokens against $4.00/1M, about 20× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.07/1M against $0.40/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 262K tokens against 131K.
  • you want provider choice — 4 listed API providers against 2.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Nemotron 3.5 Lightning was listed 11 August 2026, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 23 September 2025.

Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking if…

  • you want to self-host: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking ships open weights while Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is restricted license.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
FieldNemotron 3.5 LightningNVIDIAQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingQwen
ModelCap Index position#91#94
Index score56.055.3
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.07$0.40
Output price / 1M tokens$0.20$4.00
Context window262K tokens131K tokens
Max output tokens236K33K
API providers listed42
Weight accessRestricted licenseOpen weights
Input modalitiesTextText, Image
First listed11 August 202623 September 2025
PublisherNVIDIAQwen

Evidence: 1 public benchmark observation across 1 board · 2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Public benchmark boards where Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking has a published result
BoardNemotron 3.5 LightningQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingLeads
Arena codingArena (LMArena)—14531439–1468Only one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis12.9intelligence-index:v4.3:reasoning-unspecified—Only one result
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis10.6%hle:may-2025:text-only-2158:no-tools:pass-at-1:source-model="Nemotron 3.5 Lightning":reasoning=true—Only one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: common questions

Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning better than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 23 September 2026: #91 against #94. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Nemotron 3.5 Lightning cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is cheaper on output tokens: $0.20/1M against $4.00/1M. Input tokens are $0.07/1M for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and $0.40/1M for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $0.24 for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning versus $2.80 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking. Nemotron 3.5 Lightning costs 91.4% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning has the larger context window: 262K tokens against 131K.

Which is better for coding, Nemotron 3.5 Lightning or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

The two models do not share a coding benchmark board on ModelCap yet, so no head-to-head coding score is published; the ModelCap Index position is the closest overall signal.

Are Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking open-weight models?

Nemotron 3.5 Lightning: Restricted license. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: Open weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence; API-only models are available solely through hosted endpoints.

Where can I run Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

ModelCap currently lists 4 API providers for Nemotron 3.5 Lightning and 2 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Nemotron 3.5 Lightning vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 23 September 2026; the page re-renders within a minute of each data refresh, and the ModelCap Index positions are the same ones shown on the live rankings.

Explore further