by NVIDIA · Nemotron 3 family · best for fast open sub-agent for high-volume execution
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is NVIDIA's small open-weights workhorse, released 2026-08-11 as the smallest member of the Nemotron 3 family: a 30B-parameter hybrid Mamba-2 / Transformer mixture-of-experts that activates only 3B parameters per token, published under OpenMDW-1.1 together with its training data and recipes. It is built for the execution layer of long-running agents (tool calls, result checks, formatting, sub-agent work), not for frontier reasoning, and it runs on a single H100, a DGX Spark or a GeForce RTX 5090. NVIDIA's own evaluation table is candid about where it sits: ahead of Nemotron 3 Nano and GPT-OSS 20B, but behind Qwen3.6-35B-A3B on 13 of 14 rows (SWE-bench Verified 51.56 vs 70.12). Pick it for speed, openness and cheap self-hosting on NVIDIA hardware, not for top-of-class accuracy.
| Benchmark | Score | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.72% | huggingface.co 2026-08-11T00:00:00.000Z |
| MMLU-Pro | 81.94% | huggingface.co 2026-08-11T00:00:00.000Z |
| GPQA Diamond | 75.44% | huggingface.co 2026-08-11T00:00:00.000Z |
| Terminal-Bench | 24.58% | huggingface.co 2026-08-11T00:00:00.000Z |
| SWE-bench Verified | 51.56% | huggingface.co 2026-08-11T00:00:00.000Z |
Six personas, six verdicts — the same panel that reviews every product on TopReviewed.
“A safe, fully open small model from a vendor that is not selling tokens, though NVIDIA's own table shows Qwen ahead on accuracy at the same size.”
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is a low-risk strategic pick for the execution tier of an agent stack. NVIDIA's incentives favour keeping it open and well supported, the weights, data and recipes are published under OpenMDW-1.1, and distribution already spans NIM, four hyperscaler platforms and a dozen inference hosts. The roadmap is credible: it follows Nemotron 3 Nano with large agentic gains and sits beneath Nemotron 3 Ultra for planning work. The trade-off is capability: on NVIDIA's own table Qwen3.6-35B-A3B leads on 13 of 14 benchmarks, and Lightning is text-only. Buy it for control, speed and hardware alignment, not for best-in-class accuracy.
“Lightning is NVIDIA's bid for the agent execution layer: ship the router, the small model and the GPU together, and let frontier models plan.”
The strategic story is the system of models. NVIDIA launched Lightning alongside NeMo Switchyard, a router that sends planning to a frontier model and routine execution to Lightning, so the model's job is to make cheap, local inference on NVIDIA hardware the default for most agent calls. Differentiation comes from openness (training data and RL datasets released), NVFP4 kernels and speculative decoders tuned for NVIDIA silicon, and named enterprise customizers such as CrowdStrike, Harvey and CodeRabbit. The weakness is market position: the small-MoE class is crowded, and Qwen3.6-35B-A3B, released four months earlier, is both more accurate and more downloaded.
“No license fee, no token bill and a single-GPU footprint make this one of the cheapest agent workhorses to own, provided you run your own hardware.”
The cost case is strong for self-hosters. With 3B active parameters, the NVFP4 build runs on one RTX 5090 or DGX Spark and BF16 fits one 80GB H100, so a single card can carry high-volume tool-call traffic with no per-token charge. NVIDIA's free build.nvidia.com endpoint covers prototyping. The gaps are transparency and managed pricing: NVIDIA publishes no token rate card or rate limits, production NIM sits under an NVIDIA AI Enterprise subscription, and third-party hosts set their own prices. Against GPT-5.6 Luna at $0.20/$1.20 per 1M tokens, owning Lightning pays off only when GPU utilization stays high.
“Day-one vLLM, SGLang, TensorRT-LLM and Ollama recipes, a thinking toggle and a documented tool parser make this easy to stand up on one GPU.”
Deployment is where Lightning shines. The model card gives copy-paste recipes for vLLM, SGLang and TensorRT-LLM by GPU type, an OpenAI-compatible client, an enable_thinking switch, and tool calling through the qwen3_coder parser, with a force_nonempty_content flag for coding agents. NVFP4, GGUF and three speculative-decoding options cover everything from data centre to desktop. The friction is the capability ceiling: SWE-bench Verified 51.56 and Terminal-Bench 24.58 mean harder coding tasks should route elsewhere, the 1M window needs multi-GPU or Blackwell hardware, and it is text-only. Fine-tuning support through NeMo and a Base checkpoint is a genuine plus.
“Quick and private on a DGX Spark or RTX 5090, but it is a text-only helper for routine work, not the model you bring your hardest questions to.”
As a daily driver, Lightning appeals to anyone who wants a fast local model: Ollama and LM Studio run it with one command, and the 3B active path keeps responses snappy on desktop hardware. The limits show quickly on harder work. HLE 11.72 and AA-Omniscience 17.50 point to weak hard reasoning and factual recall, it cannot read images or PDFs, and on cards under 24GB Ollama drops the context to 4K. Reasoning is on by default, which lengthens simple answers unless switched off. It is a good local assistant for drafting, summarizing and scripting, and a poor substitute for a frontier chat model.
“Credit to NVIDIA for a table where its own model loses, but the 'frontier-level intelligence' line in the launch post does not survive that table.”
NVIDIA's launch blog promises "frontier-level intelligence", while its own model card shows Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ahead on 13 of 14 benchmarks, by 18 to 24 points on SWE-bench Verified, SWE-bench Multilingual and Terminal-Bench 2.1. The speed claims (up to 4x output speed, 30% faster PinchBench completion) and the Artificial Analysis Pareto-frontier claim are vendor-presented. Six weeks after release, independent data is thin: every score here comes from NVIDIA's own harness, and no third-party throughput or leaderboard figure is cited. In its favour, the table is unusually candid, the reproduction recipes are public, and open weights let anyone rerun them. Treat it as a fast, honest mid-pack model, not a class leader.
Sub-agent execution in a routed agent stack: a frontier model plans, and Lightning handles the high-volume calls underneath (tool invocations, validating tool output, formatting results, routine git and file operations). NeMo Switchyard is built for exactly this split, and PinchBench 85.37 shows the model holds up on that kind of work.
Private or offline agents on local hardware. A DGX Spark, an RTX 5090 workstation or an on-premises H100 can run the model with no per-token bill and no data leaving the building, which suits regulated teams and edge deployments.
Domain fine-tuning. With BF16 and Base checkpoints, released training data and NeMo recipes for LoRA, SFT and RL, Lightning is a cheap starting point for a specialist model; NVIDIA names CrowdStrike, Harvey, CodeRabbit and Fastino Labs as customizing it.
Not the pick for hard multi-file coding, research-grade reasoning, or anything that needs images or documents in the same model.
The full research notes behind this review — verified against primary sources.
Nemotron 3.5 Lightning is a hybrid mixture-of-experts with 30B total and 3B active parameters. Its published config shows 52 layers: 23 Mamba-2 state-space layers, 23 MoE feed-forward layers and 6 attention layers, plus one multi-token-prediction layer. Each MoE layer holds 128 routed experts and one shared expert, with 6 routed experts active per token; the few attention layers use grouped-query attention (32 query heads, 2 KV heads). Because most of the stack is state-space rather than attention, the attention-type field is left null, as it is for the rest of the Nemotron 3 family. Vocabulary is 131,072 tokens. Pre-training ran on more than 20 trillion tokens with an NVFP4 recipe, followed by continued pre-training for the MTP layer, supervised fine-tuning (code, math, science, tool calling, structured output, long-range retrieval) and multi-environment GRPO reinforcement learning. Part of the post-training data was distilled from open teacher models including GPT-OSS-120B and Qwen3-235B. The config ships with a 262,144-token position limit; NVIDIA's 1M-token recipes raise it explicitly and call for 8x H100, a GB200 or a B200. Training compute is not disclosed.
Coding (6.8) rests on NVIDIA-measured SWE-bench Verified 51.56, SWE-bench Multilingual 39.33 and Terminal-Bench 2.1 24.58: useful for routine repository tasks and code review, but clearly behind Qwen3.6-35B-A3B (70.12 / 63.40 / 44.38) and Gemma 4 26B A4B (57.40 on SWE-bench Verified). Reasoning (7.5) is anchored by MMLU-Pro 81.94 and GPQA Diamond 75.44, solid for 3B active parameters but eight points below Qwen on GPQA; HLE 11.72 confirms it is not a hard-reasoning model. Math (7.0) has no dedicated published score (no AIME row), so it is scored conservatively. Agentic work (7.0) is the design target: PinchBench 85.37 is close to Qwen's 88.07, and BrowseComp 36.97 and GDPval-AA-V2 832 beat Gemma 4, but τ³-bench Banking 9.28 is weak, as it is for the whole class. Instruction following (7.5) is a relative strength, with IFBench 71.88 ahead of Qwen's 63.71. Function calling (7.5) reflects harness-specific tool-call training and a documented tool parser. Long context (7.0) offers a real 1M window, but AA-LCR 52.00 trails Qwen (61.06) and Nemotron 3 Super (58.44). Multilingual (6.0) covers English plus Spanish, French, German, Italian and Japanese. Creative writing (5.5) is not a focus. Safety calibration (6.5) is left largely to the deployer. The model is text-only, so vision and OCR score 0, and it has no built-in live data (0).
| Benchmark | Score | vs Nemotron 3 Nano | vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 81.94 | 78.46 | 85.63 | NVIDIA model card |
| GPQA Diamond (no tools) | 75.44 | 74.05 | 83.40 | NVIDIA model card |
| HLE (text-only, no tools) | 11.72 | 10.89 | 19.56 | NVIDIA model card |
| SciCode | 32.60 | 30.08 | 35.33 | NVIDIA model card |
| SWE-bench Verified | 51.56 | 34.08 | 70.12 | NVIDIA model card |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 39.33 | 14.07 | 63.40 | NVIDIA model card |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | 24.58 | 8.29 | 44.38 | NVIDIA model card |
| PinchBench | 85.37 | 66.11 | 88.07 | NVIDIA model card |
| BrowseComp | 36.97 | 13.74 | 48.74 | NVIDIA model card |
| τ³-bench (Banking) | 9.28 | 7.01 | 10.52 | NVIDIA model card |
| GDPval-AA-V2 | 832 | 473 | 1015 | NVIDIA model card |
| IFBench (loose) | 71.88 | 72.17 | 63.71 | NVIDIA model card |
| AA-LCR | 52.00 | 32.75 | 61.06 | NVIDIA model card |
| AA-Omniscience | 17.50 | 20.15 | 19.47 | NVIDIA model card |
Every figure is vendor-reported: NVIDIA measured all the models in this table, competitors included, under its own NeMo Gym / NeMo Evaluator harness, and notes the numbers may differ from each vendor's self-reported scores. NVIDIA publishes the recipes to reproduce them. Scores are for the BF16 checkpoint; the NVFP4 checkpoint lands within about three points on every percentage row (SWE-bench Verified 52.80, MMLU-Pro 81.62, AA-LCR 49.19). MMLU-Pro, GPQA Diamond, SWE-bench Verified, Terminal-Bench 2.1 and HLE map to the catalog's compare columns; IFBench (not IFEval), AA-LCR (not MRCR) and τ³-bench Banking (not τ-bench) stay in this table only, to avoid mismatched compare rows. No independent leaderboard score is cited yet.
No independent throughput or first-token measurement is available yet, so the speed fields are null. NVIDIA's own claims, which are vendor-reported: up to 4x the output speed of similar-sized models, and 10,000 PinchBench tasks completed 30% faster than Qwen3.6 35B at comparable accuracy. The mechanics behind those claims are concrete: only 3B parameters are active per token, the Mamba-2 layers keep long-context cost down, and three speculative-decoding options ship with the model (built-in MTP for medium-to-high concurrency, the DSpark drafter for DGX Spark and low-concurrency data-centre serving, and DFlash). Reasoning is on by default; turning it off with enable_thinking=False is the main latency lever for short tool-call turns.
| Surface | Cost | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Weights (self-host) | Free | OpenMDW-1.1; BF16, NVFP4 and Base checkpoints |
| build.nvidia.com endpoint | Free | prototyping API with an NVIDIA API key; limits not published |
| NVIDIA NIM (self-hosted) | NVIDIA AI Enterprise | 90-day evaluation offered for production use |
| Hosted inference | Metered | DeepInfra, Together AI, Fireworks AI, Baseten and others, at their own rates |
| OpenRouter | Metered | named by NVIDIA as an access route |
| First-party per-token API | None | NVIDIA publishes no token rate card |
NVIDIA's business is GPUs, not tokens, so every price field is null. Self-hosting costs only hardware: the NVFP4 build runs on a single RTX 5090 or DGX Spark, and BF16 fits one 80GB H100 at a 256K context. Metered access runs through third-party hosts at their own prices.
Open weights on Hugging Face in three NVIDIA checkpoints: BF16 (reference weights for customization), NVFP4 (NVIDIA's recommended build for production inference) and Base (pre-trained, for fine-tuning), plus the DSpark and DFlash drafter models and an official GGUF from ggml-org. NVIDIA's validated recipes run BF16 on one H100 or A100 80GB at a 256K context, and the full 1M context on 8x H100 (tensor plus expert parallel), a GB200 or a B200; NVFP4 runs on DGX Spark, H100 and GB200, with Ampere covered through W4A16, and TensorRT-LLM recipes sit on the NVFP4 card. For local use, Ollama (ollama run nemotron-3.5-lightning), llama.cpp and LM Studio all have recipes; NVIDIA names the GeForce RTX 5090 as its smallest discrete-GPU target, and Ollama sizes context to available memory (4K under 24GB, 32K at 24 to 48GB, 256K above 48GB). NVIDIA also lists Jetson, RTX PCs and DGX Station as targets. Managed routes: the NIM container nvcr.io/nim/nvidia/nemotron-3.5-lightning-30b-a3b, Amazon SageMaker JumpStart, Google Cloud Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform, Microsoft Foundry and OCI Enterprise AI, plus hosted inference from Baseten, Bitdeer AI, BlackBox AI, CoreWeave, Crusoe, DeepInfra, Fireworks AI, FriendliAI, GMI Cloud, Modal, Nebius and Together AI, OpenRouter, and a ModelScope mirror.
NVIDIA frames the release under its Trustworthy AI policy and ships Model Card++ subcards for bias, explainability, privacy and safety rather than a named safety framework, so that field is null. The card documents a training-data bias analysis and filters that removed teacher-model reasoning traces aligned with political entities or nationalistic narratives, and it asks deployers not to remove the model's safety guardrails without an equivalent replacement. Self-hosting keeps prompts on your own infrastructure, so NVIDIA never sees inputs; the free build.nvidia.com endpoint is NVIDIA-hosted and governed by NVIDIA's terms of use. No compliance certifications attach to an open-weights release. Moderation is the deployer's job: NVIDIA's Nemotron Safety models and NeMo Guardrails are the matching tools, and community fine-tunes with the safety tuning removed already circulate on Hugging Face. OpenMDW-1.1 permits commercial use but is new enough to warrant a legal read.
Serving support landed on day one across vLLM, SGLang and TensorRT-LLM, with NVIDIA NIM for containerized deployment and Ollama, llama.cpp, LM Studio, Unsloth and Exo for local use. NVIDIA lists agent-harness partners including Cline, Kilo Code, OpenHands, OpenCode, Factory AI, Hermes Agent, OpenClaw and LangChain, and post-training partners including Prime Intellect, Thinking Machines Lab and distil labs. Named enterprise customizers are CrowdStrike (cybersecurity), Harvey with Trajectory (legal), CodeRabbit with Baseten (code review), Lila Sciences and Fastino Labs. Adoption is strong for a six-week-old model: on Hugging Face the NVFP4 checkpoint has about 1.59 million all-time downloads and BF16 about 0.70 million, with dozens of community GGUF, MLX and FP8 builds, including a Red Hat FP8 version. NeMo Switchyard, released alongside it, makes Lightning a routing target next to frontier models, and it sits in the Nemotron 3 family beneath Nemotron 3 Super and Nemotron 3 Ultra.
Yes. The weights are on Hugging Face under OpenMDW-1.1, and NVIDIA's model card states the model is ready for commercial use. OpenMDW-1.1 is newer than Apache-2.0 or MIT, so have counsel read it before shipping.
The BF16 weights run on one 80GB H100 or A100 at a 256K context. The NVFP4 build runs on a DGX Spark, an H100 or a GeForce RTX 5090, and official GGUF builds run in llama.cpp, Ollama and LM Studio. The full 1M context needs 8x H100, a GB200 or a B200.
NVIDIA offers a free prototyping endpoint on build.nvidia.com and a NIM container for self-hosting, but no per-token rate card. Metered access comes from hosts such as DeepInfra, Together AI, Fireworks AI and Baseten, and through OpenRouter, each at its own price.
On NVIDIA's own table Qwen leads on 13 of 14 benchmarks, by wide margins on coding and agentic tasks. Lightning leads on IFBench and, per NVIDIA, completes PinchBench tasks about 30% faster at similar accuracy. Choose Qwen for accuracy and image input, Lightning for speed on NVIDIA hardware and fully open training data.
Yes, and that is a primary use. NVIDIA ships BF16 and Base checkpoints for LoRA or full SFT with NeMo Automodel and Megatron Bridge, and RL with NeMo RL and NeMo Gym. Fastino Labs has already published finance and healthcare fine-tunes on Hugging Face.
Yes. The model card documents tool calling through an OpenAI-compatible API (the vLLM qwen3_coder tool parser), and build.nvidia.com lists function calling, structured output and reasoning. For coding agents NVIDIA recommends the force_nonempty_content template flag.
No. It is text-in, text-out; pair it with a vision model such as Nemotron 3 Nano Omni if screenshots or scanned documents are involved.
Pre-training data runs to September 2025 and post-training data to May 2026. Use retrieval for anything newer.
The class leader Lightning is measured against: the same 3B-active size, Apache-2.0, image input, and ahead on 13 of 14 rows of NVIDIA's own table (SWE-bench Verified 70.12 vs 51.56). Lightning wins on instruction following (IFBench 71.88 vs 63.71), NVIDIA's claimed 30% faster task completion, and fully open training data.
Apache-2.0, multimodal, and a first-party API at $0.15/$0.60 per 1M tokens, but a 119B / 6.5B-active model that Mistral sizes at about 60GB even at FP4, with a 256K context. Lightning is far lighter to self-host and has the longer window; for dense sub-15B options, Mistral's Ministral 3 line (3B/8B/14B, Apache-2.0, vision) is the closer edge match.
OpenAI's nano-tier model at $0.20/$1.20 per 1M tokens, with a 1.05M context, image input, built-in web search and a Batch API. Luna wins on turnkey managed access and multimodality; Lightning wins wherever weights must stay on your hardware or be fine-tuned.
Google's low-cost tier at $0.30/$2.50 per 1M tokens, taking text, image, video, audio and PDF input with a 1M context and Search grounding. It is the stronger all-rounder as a managed API; Lightning is the choice for offline, on-premises or edge agents with no per-token bill.
Primary references used to verify this review.
Does not train on API inputs by default
Last verified 2026-09-21