Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 (Qwen) 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 22 September 2026

As of 22 September 2026, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#92 vs #107); Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 is 20.7× cheaper per output token ($0.193/1M vs $4.00/1M); and Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 offers the longer context window (262K vs 131K tokens).

Which should you choose?

Choose Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 if…

  • API cost matters — $0.193/1M output tokens against $4.00/1M, about 20.7× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.048/1M against $0.40/1M.
  • you need the longer context window — 262K tokens against 131K.
  • you want provider choice — 5 listed API providers against 2.

Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #92 against #107 (54.6 vs 50.5 points).
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1453 against 1439.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking was listed 23 September 2025, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 29 July 2025.

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
FieldQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507QwenQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingQwen
ModelCap Index position#107#92
Index score50.554.6
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$0.048$0.40
Output price / 1M tokens$0.193$4.00
Context window262K tokens131K tokens
Max output tokens32K33K
API providers listed52
Weight accessOpen weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesTextText, Image
First listed29 July 202523 September 2025
PublisherQwenQwen

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

Benchmark scores: Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

Public benchmark boards where Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking has a published result
BoardQwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingLeads
Arena codingArena (LMArena)14391430–144814531439–1468Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
BFCL V4UC Berkeley (Gorilla)41.4Function calling—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.

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: common questions

Is Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 better than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 22 September 2026: #92 against #107. 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 Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 is cheaper on output tokens: $0.193/1M against $4.00/1M. Input tokens are $0.048/1M for Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 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 $0.19 for Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 versus $2.80 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking. Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs 93.1% 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, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 has the larger context window: 262K tokens against 131K.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

Arena coding: Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 1439, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 1453 — Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking leads.

Are Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking open-weight models?

Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507: Open weights. 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 Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

ModelCap currently lists 5 API providers for Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 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 Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking comparison?

Every figure comes from the sealed ModelCap dataset published 22 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