Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning) vs Claude Haiku 5.5 (high)
Results updated 9 November 2026 · In Terminus-2 and Claude Code, so part of any gap can come from the harness · How we benchmark
Verdict
Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) clearly beats Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning) by 20 points, and is cheaper and faster.
- Cost per task
- $0.011 vs $0.0085
- Time per task
- 13.8 min vs 1.4 min
- Tokens per attempt
- 105k vs 271k
- Image input
- No vs Yes
Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code scores higher than Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 on all 3 evaluations scored for both. Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code is cheaper and faster: $0.0085 against $0.011 per task, and 1.4 min against 13.8 min.
Where they differ most
By kind of work, share of tasks passed, 0 to 100 · Higher is better
| Kind of work | Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning) | Claude Haiku 5.5 (high) |
|---|---|---|
| Climate and time series | 50 | 78 |
| Remote sensing and raster analysis | 54 | 79 |
| Change detection | 56 | 72 |
| GIS analysis | 70 | 82 |
Where the tasks are set: each kind of work links to its tasks and scoresCharts for each: Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 · Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code.
Side by side
| Metric | Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 | Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index: Text only | 56 | 76 |
| Geospatial Agent Index: Text + vision | No data | 74 |
| Earth-Bench V2 score | 49 | 72 |
| GeoBenchX score | 56 | 72 |
| GS-QA2 score | 63 | 83 |
| Vision agents score | No data | 70 |
| GeoAgentBench score (Guided workflows; not in the Agent Index) | 83 | 98 |
| GeoAnalystBench score (Guided workflows; not in the Agent Index) | 79 | 84 |
| OGD4All score (standalone; in no index) | 85 | 96 |
| GeoNatureAgent score (standalone; in no index) | 100 | 100 |
| MultiGlobeQA score (standalone; in no index) | 70 | 74 |
| GeoAgentEval score (standalone; in no index) | 84 | 92 |
| ImpactMesh score (standalone; in no index) | No data | No data |
| Remote sensing and raster analysis score | 54 | 79 |
| Change detection score | 56 | 72 |
| GIS analysis score | 70 | 82 |
| Climate and time series score | 50 | 78 |
| Making maps score | 70 | 81 |
| Cost per task | $0.011 | $0.0085 |
| Time per task (at 100 output tokens/s) | 13.8 min | 1.4 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 105k | 271k |
| Turns per attempt | 10.5 | 7.1 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $0.20 | $0.10 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $0.50 | $0.50 |
| Context window | 262,144 | 1,000,000 |
| Image input | No | Yes |
| Developer | NVIDIA | Anthropic |
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code, 76 to 56.
Which is cheaper per task, Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code, $0.0085 to $0.011.
Which writes fewer output tokens per task, Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code, 6k to 8k.
Which has the larger context window, Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B (Reasoning), Terminus-2 or Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Haiku 5.5 (high), Claude Code, 1,000,000 tokens to 262,144 tokens.