Model decision surface
Compare AI models
Start with Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and Qwen3 30B A3B, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.
Current public data
Qwen2.5 72B Instruct vs Qwen3 30B A3B
Live dataset updated 11/7/2026, 12:54:46 AM UTC
Open 1200×630 evidence receipt| Field | Qwen3 30B A3B Qwen | |
|---|---|---|
| ModelCap position | #249 | #213 |
| Index score | 27.6 | 34.0 |
| Evidence | Measured2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards | Measured2 public benchmark observations across 2 boards |
| Input / 1M | $0.36 | $0.12 |
| Output / 1M | $0.40 | $0.50 |
| Pricing status | fresh | fresh |
| Context | 33K | 41K |
| Providers | 1 | 1 |
| Weight access | Restricted license | Open weights |
Decision facts
- Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is #249; Qwen3 30B A3B is #213 on the same current language board.
- Index scores are 27.6 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and 34.0 for Qwen3 30B A3B. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
- Both positions use Measured evidence.
- Listed output price per 1M tokens is $0.40 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and $0.50 for Qwen3 30B A3B. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $0.92 for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct versus $0.49 for Qwen3 30B A3B. Qwen3 30B A3B costs 46.7% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.
- Published context is 32,768 tokens for Qwen2.5 72B Instruct and 40,960 for Qwen3 30B A3B.
- Weight access differs: Qwen2.5 72B Instruct is restricted; Qwen3 30B A3B is open.
These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.
Popular comparisons
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 4 Argon#1 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5#3 vs #1 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Argon#3 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Wonder#1 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Wonder#2 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Wonder#3 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.3#1 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Spark 1.3#2 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3#3 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Muse Wonder#5 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#1 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon#6 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash#3 vs #6 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Wonder#6 vs #4 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.3#6 vs #5 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#1 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 4 Argon vs GPT-6.1 Sol#2 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#3 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Wonder vs GPT-6.1 Sol#4 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs GPT-6.1 Sol#5 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol#6 vs #8 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview#1 vs #10 on the ModelCap Index
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Gemini 4 Argon#10 vs #2 on the ModelCap Index
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview#3 vs #10 on the ModelCap Index
Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.