Created bymario-alka.dePowered bygodcore.denoob2claw.detricoma.de
Contributed byMario AlkaNVIDIA

Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B

Performance benchmark · measured on 29.07.2026 10:14

Benchmark-IDrun-20260729-105341-7fea97
Timebench 3 - Kombi (Prefill + Generation)MoE120BRuntime: llama.cppQuantisierung: Q4_K_M
Generation12,12tok/s
Prefill98,01tok/s
Time to First Token21.965,50ms
Total duration212,93s
Concurrency1parallel
Ranking in the field
1258of 1559 systems

Performance benchmark · Primary metric: Generation-Speed (tok/s) · 1× concurrent

This run is better than 19 % of all comparable systems.
Generation 12,1 tok/s
-85 % vs Ø 79,0
Prefill 98,0 tok/s
-97 % vs Ø 2.834,3
Time to First Token 21.966 ms
-18 % vs Ø 26.805
Distribution in the field0 – 405 tok/s
Ø 79 Median Dieser Lauf

Wie schlägt sich dieser Benchmark mit anderen Modellen?

How does this benchmark compare on other GPUs?

Same model on different hardware · 1× concurrent · Generation (tok/s)

Hardware

GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti · 16 GB VRAM
CPU: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores
RAM: 247 GB
Mainboard: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI

Setup

Runtime: llama.cpp
Quantization: Q4_K_M
Model: Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B

Configuration

benchmark-konfiguration — run-20260729-105341-7fea97
# LLM-Benchmark Konfiguration # Modell : Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B # Engine : llama.cpp # Run-ID : run-20260729-105341-7fea97 # GPU : NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti # CPU : AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores # RAM : 247 GB bench@llm-benchmark:~$ /home/godcore/llama.cpp/build/bin/llama-server \ -m /home/godcore/.cache/huggingface/hub/models--DevQuasar--nvidia.NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B-BF16-GGUF/snapshots/fe70b8fa41864e382a726d44b138588c124d7337/nvidia.NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B-BF16.Q4_K_M-00001-of-00006.gguf \ --alias NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B \ --host 0.0.0.0 \ --port 8000 \ -ngl 12 \ -c 16384 \ -np 4 \ --jinja
Engine?Die Inferenz-Software, die das Modell ausliefert (z.B. vLLM oder llama.cpp). Sie bestimmt Geschwindigkeit, unterstuetzte Modellformate und welche Parameter ueberhaupt verfuegbar sind.llamacpp
Modellalias?Der Name, unter dem das Modell ueber die API angesprochen wird. Genau dieser Wert muss im Request-Feld 'model' stehen.NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B
Kontextlaenge?Maximale Anzahl Tokens (Eingabe + erzeugte Ausgabe zusammen), die das Modell pro Anfrage verarbeiten kann.16384
Modellpfad?Pfad zur GGUF-Modelldatei, die geladen und ausgeliefert wird./home/godcore/.cache/huggingface/hub/models--DevQuasar--nvidia.NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B-BF16-GGUF/snapshots/fe70b8fa41864e382a726d44b138588c124d7337/nvidia.NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B-BF16.Q4_K_M-00001-of-00006.gguf
GPU-Layer?Anzahl der auf die GPU ausgelagerten Modell-Layer. Hoeher = mehr VRAM und schneller; der Rest laeuft auf der CPU. 999 = alles auf GPU.12
Kontext?Groesse des Kontextfensters in Token. 0 = der beim Training verwendete Kontext des Modells.16384
np4

All benchmarks of this model To leaderboard

Anzeige
Model comparison

Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B on various hardware

All published performance runs of this model – each bubble a variant: position = prefill (X) × generation (Y), bubble size = number of runs. Closer to the top right = faster. ★ Marked gold = this benchmark.

GPUby graphics card

7805853901950,009641.9272.891Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition - 600,9 tok/s Generation, 837 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 73.953 ms (9 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 B...NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition - 423,4 tok/s Generation, 2.339 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 12.569 ms (12 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 B...AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 - 80,5 tok/s Generation, 436 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 102.716 ms (17 Laufe)AMD Radeon AI PRO R97...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti - 18,9 tok/s Generation, 106 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 171.396 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30...NVIDIA GB10 (DGX Spark) - 11,4 tok/s Generation, 1.495 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.449 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA GB10 (DGX Spar...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 - 5,5 tok/s Generation, 49 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 150.808 ms (8 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti - 32,6 tok/s Generation, 88 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 156.105 ms (6 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50...
NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition 600,9 tok/sNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition 423,4 tok/sAMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 80,5 tok/s★ NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti 32,6 tok/s this runNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 18,9 tok/sNVIDIA GB10 (DGX Spark) 11,4 tok/sNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 5,5 tok/s

CPUby processor

7805853901950,009641.9272.891Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor - 600,9 tok/s Generation, 837 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 73.953 ms (9 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 24-Cores - 423,4 tok/s Generation, 2.339 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 12.569 ms (12 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores - 80,5 tok/s Generation, 436 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 102.716 ms (17 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX with Radeon Graphics - 18,9 tok/s Generation, 106 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 171.396 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX wi...NVIDIA Grace - 11,4 tok/s Generation, 1.495 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.449 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA GraceAMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8-Core Processor - 5,5 tok/s Generation, 49 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 150.808 ms (8 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores - 32,6 tok/s Generation, 88 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 156.105 ms (6 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor 600,9 tok/sAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 24-Cores 423,4 tok/sAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores 80,5 tok/s★ AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores 32,6 tok/s this runAMD Ryzen 9 8945HX with Radeon Graphics 18,9 tok/sNVIDIA Grace 11,4 tok/sAMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8-Core Processor 5,5 tok/s

MBby mainboard

7805853901950,006151.2301.845Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI - 600,9 tok/s Generation, 837 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 73.953 ms (9 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE - 423,4 tok/s Generation, 1.223 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 65.414 ms (29 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....Meigao Innovation Technology (Shen Zhen) Co., Ltd DRFXL (MotherBoard Series) - 18,9 tok/s Generation, 106 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 171.396 ms (3 Laufe)Meigao Innovation Tec...ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. GX10 - 11,4 tok/s Generation, 1.495 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.449 ms (1 Lauf)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING - 5,5 tok/s Generation, 49 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 150.808 ms (8 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI - 32,6 tok/s Generation, 88 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 156.105 ms (6 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI 600,9 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE 423,4 tok/s★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI 32,6 tok/s this runMeigao Innovation Technology (Shen Zhen) Co., Ltd DRFXL (MotherBoard Series) 18,9 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. GX10 11,4 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING 5,5 tok/s

ENGby engine

7795843891950,05909631.3361.709Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)vLLM - 11,4 tok/s Generation, 1.495 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.449 ms (1 Lauf)vLLMllama.cpp - 600,9 tok/s Generation, 804 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 94.906 ms (55 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ llama.cpp
★ llama.cpp 600,9 tok/s this runvLLM 11,4 tok/s

DRVby driver

7795843891950,05909631.3361.709Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)unbekannt - 600,9 tok/s Generation, 804 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 94.906 ms (55 Laufe)unbekanntNVIDIA 590.48.01 / CUDA 13.1 - 11,4 tok/s Generation, 1.495 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 1.449 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA 590.48.01 / CU...
unbekannt 600,9 tok/sNVIDIA 590.48.01 / CUDA 13.1 11,4 tok/s
💰 Economics

Economics of this run

Operating cost, TCO and comparison with the next-best runs of the same model at identical concurrency (1× concurrent). Methodology →

⚙️ ConfigurationAll metrics and charts below follow these settings – based on a 24-month runtime.Save to URLReset
⚡ Electricity price EUR/kWh
⚙️ System utilization 100 %
🖥️ Acquisition EUR
🔌 Idle 10 W
⚡ TDP 310 W
☁️ External LLM (API)
Electricity0.30 EUR/kWh
Avg power (incl. idle)310 W estimated (TDP)GPU 300 + Board 10 W full load
Avg cost / hourEUR 0.093
Electricity / 1M tokensEUR 2.13
Token / kWh140.75K
Acquisition (system)EUR 5,000 partial priceGPU EUR 994 · CPU EUR 1,880 · RAM EUR 1,976 · PSU EUR 150
Electricity (2 years)
TCO (2 years)EUR 6,629
Output tokens (2 years)764.43M
☁️ External LLM (API) – comparison
External LLM cost (2 years)
Savings vs. external (2 years)

All values above and the charts below take the configured system utilization into account: at X% the system generates only X% of the time, the rest it idles (10 W). Cost per hour drops (more idle), cost per token rises.

Cost over 2 years – electricity only

Cost over 2 years – incl. acquisition (TCO)

Speed vs. tokens per euro

Euro per 1M tokens

Comparison vs. API – economics per benchmark

Nemotron-3-Super-120B-A12BNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 TiNemotron-3-Super-120B-A12BNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation EditionNemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation EditionNemotron-3-Super-120B-A12B3x NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition
Electricity cost (24 mo.)
Acquisition cost
Total cost (TCO)
Generated tokens (24 mo.)
Token price via API
Break-even point (days)
Result (savings / extra cost)

Comparison with up to 3 next-best runs of this model at the same concurrency (at least one on different hardware). Power = GPU TDP + CPU (idle + 15 %) + board (estimated), acquisition = full system (GPU + CPU + board + RAM + PSU), prices = stored market prices.

Contributed by

Mario Alka Administrator

@marioalka

Ich bin Unternehmer, Softwareentwickler und KI-Enthusiast. Seit vielen Jahren entwickle ich Unternehmenssoftware und beschäftige mich inzwischen fast täglich mit lokalen LLMs, KI-Agenten und leistungsfähiger KI-Hardware.

Mit LLM-Benchmark.de möchte ich eine Plattform schaffen, auf der Modelle, GPUs und Agenten objektiv und reproduzierbar miteinander verglichen werden.