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

OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B

Performance benchmark · measured on 28.08.2026 11:52

Benchmark-IDrun-20260828-101910-60ca51
Timebench 3 - Kombi (Prefill + Generation)Dense32BRuntime: llama.cppQuantisierung: Q4_K_M
Generation31,27tok/s
Prefill1.242,25tok/s
Time to First Token1.972,00ms
Total duration69,44s
Concurrency1parallel
Ranking in the field
822of 1374 systems

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

This run is better than 40 % of all comparable systems.
Generation 31,3 tok/s
-60 % vs Ø 77,4
Prefill 1.242,3 tok/s
-54 % vs Ø 2.671,6
Time to First Token 1.972 ms
-93 % vs Ø 30.268
Distribution in the field0 – 405 tok/s
Ø 77 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: 2x NVIDIA RTX A6000 · 48 GB VRAM
CPU: AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores
RAM: 184 GB
Mainboard: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE

Setup

Runtime: llama.cpp
Quantization: Q4_K_M
Model: OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B

Configuration

benchmark-konfiguration — run-20260828-101910-60ca51
# LLM-Benchmark Konfiguration # Modell : OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B # Engine : llama.cpp # Run-ID : run-20260828-101910-60ca51 # GPU : 2x NVIDIA RTX A6000 # CPU : AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores # RAM : 184 GB bench@llm-benchmark:~$ /home/godcore/llama.cpp/build/bin/llama-server \ -m nvidia_OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B-Q4_K_M.gguf \ -ngl 999 \ -fa on \ -c 32768 \ -np 8 \ -sm layer '(2x' RTX A6000 '48GB)'
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
Kontextlaenge?Maximale Anzahl Tokens (Eingabe + erzeugte Ausgabe zusammen), die das Modell pro Anfrage verarbeiten kann.32768
Modellpfad?Pfad zur GGUF-Modelldatei, die geladen und ausgeliefert wird.nvidia_OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B-Q4_K_M.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.999
faon
Kontext?Groesse des Kontextfensters in Token. 0 = der beim Training verwendete Kontext des Modells.32768
np8
Split-Mode?Verteilung ueber mehrere GPUs: none (nur eine GPU), layer (Layer aufteilen) oder row (Tensoren zeilenweise).layer

All benchmarks of this model To leaderboard

Anzeige
Model comparison

OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B 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

6254693131560,001.8603.7215.581Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 - 481,0 tok/s Generation, 3.983 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 10.140 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50...NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition - 480,0 tok/s Generation, 4.502 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 9.693 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 B...NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition - 411,7 tok/s Generation, 4.317 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 11.939 ms (9 Laufe)NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 B...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti - 236,8 tok/s Generation, 2.036 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 20.847 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti - 49,9 tok/s Generation, 621 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 94.653 ms (3 Laufe)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 50...AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 - 23,3 tok/s Generation, 214 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 162.122 ms (7 Laufe)AMD Radeon AI PRO R97...AMD Radeon 8060S Graphics - 16,5 tok/s Generation, 691 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 41.832 ms (1 Lauf)AMD Radeon 8060S Grap...NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 - 1,1 tok/s Generation, 8 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 266.668 ms (1 Lauf)NVIDIA GeForce RTX 20...NVIDIA RTX A6000 - 140,0 tok/s Generation, 1.908 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 10.507 ms (9 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ NVIDIA RTX A6000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 481,0 tok/sNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation Edition 480,0 tok/sNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Workstation Edition 411,7 tok/sNVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 236,8 tok/s★ NVIDIA RTX A6000 140,0 tok/s this runNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti 49,9 tok/sAMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 23,3 tok/sAMD Radeon 8060S Graphics 16,5 tok/sNVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 1,1 tok/s

CPUby processor

6254693131560,001.8603.7215.581Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8-Core Processor - 481,0 tok/s Generation, 3.983 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 10.140 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8...AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor - 480,0 tok/s Generation, 4.502 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 9.693 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 24-Cores - 411,7 tok/s Generation, 4.317 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 11.939 ms (9 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX with Radeon Graphics - 236,8 tok/s Generation, 2.036 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 20.847 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX wi...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores - 49,9 tok/s Generation, 621 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 94.653 ms (3 Laufe)AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...AMD RYZEN AI MAX+ 395 w/ Radeon 8060S - 16,5 tok/s Generation, 691 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 41.832 ms (1 Lauf)AMD RYZEN AI MAX+ 395...Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-4620 v2 @ 2.60GHz - 1,1 tok/s Generation, 8 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 266.668 ms (1 Lauf)Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU ...AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores - 140,0 tok/s Generation, 1.167 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 76.839 ms (16 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ AMD Ryzen Threadrippe...
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D 8-Core Processor 481,0 tok/sAMD Ryzen 9 9950X 16-Core Processor 480,0 tok/sAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9965WX 24-Cores 411,7 tok/sAMD Ryzen 9 8945HX with Radeon Graphics 236,8 tok/s★ AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX 16-Cores 140,0 tok/s this runAMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5975WX 32-Cores 49,9 tok/sAMD RYZEN AI MAX+ 395 w/ Radeon 8060S 16,5 tok/sIntel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-4620 v2 @ 2.60GHz 1,1 tok/s

MBby mainboard

6254693131560,001.8603.7215.581Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING - 481,0 tok/s Generation, 3.983 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 10.140 ms (3 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI - 480,0 tok/s Generation, 4.502 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 9.693 ms (3 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....Meigao Innovation Technology (Shen Zhen) Co., Ltd DRFXL (MotherBoard Series) - 236,8 tok/s Generation, 2.036 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 20.847 ms (3 Laufe)Meigao Innovation Tec...ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI - 49,9 tok/s Generation, 621 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 94.653 ms (3 Laufe)ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....Bosgame AXB35-02 (BeyondMax Series) - 16,5 tok/s Generation, 691 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 41.832 ms (1 Lauf)Bosgame AXB35-02 (Bey...Dell Inc. PowerEdge R820 - 1,1 tok/s Generation, 8 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 266.668 ms (1 Lauf)Dell Inc. PowerEdge R...ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE - 411,7 tok/s Generation, 2.301 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 53.475 ms (25 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC....
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING 481,0 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ProArt X870E-CREATOR WIFI 480,0 tok/s★ ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX90E-SAGE SE 411,7 tok/s this runMeigao Innovation Technology (Shen Zhen) Co., Ltd DRFXL (MotherBoard Series) 236,8 tok/sASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. Pro WS WRX80E-SAGE SE WIFI 49,9 tok/sBosgame AXB35-02 (BeyondMax Series) 16,5 tok/sDell Inc. PowerEdge R820 1,1 tok/s

ENGby engine

5295054814574332.2092.3032.3972.491Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)llama.cpp - 481,0 tok/s Generation, 2.350 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 52.599 ms (39 Laufe) | DIESER LAUF★ llama.cpp
★ llama.cpp 481,0 tok/s this run

DRVby driver

5295054814574332.2092.3032.3972.491Prefill (tok/s)Generation (tok/s)unbekannt - 481,0 tok/s Generation, 2.350 tok/s Prefill, TTFT 52.599 ms (39 Laufe)unbekannt
unbekannt 481,0 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 95 W
⚡ TDP 671 W
☁️ External LLM (API)
Electricity0.30 EUR/kWh
Avg power (incl. idle)671 W estimated (TDP)GPU 600 + CPU 46 + Board 25 W full load
Avg cost / hourEUR 0.20
Electricity / 1M tokensEUR 1.79
Token / kWh167.77K
Acquisition (system)EUR 11,454 full priceGPU EUR 6,000 · CPU EUR 1,399 · Board EUR 1,299 · RAM EUR 2,576 · PSU EUR 180
Electricity (2 years)
TCO (2 years)EUR 14,981
Output tokens (2 years)1.97B
☁️ 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 (95 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

OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B2x NVIDIA RTX A6000OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32BNVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090OpenReasoning-Nemotron-32BNVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Workstation EditionOpenReasoning-Nemotron-32B3x 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.