Model Comparison
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
vs. Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Anthropic, Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct 10 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Output price
Best Value
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct
100.0 value score
36.1 reasoning / $0.35/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct
$0.19/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct
36.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
26.0 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct is 19.7x cheaper on input tokens than Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct leads Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) by 5.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) leads Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct by 6.6 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct wins 10 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Output price, Blended price.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | An Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) | Top Pick Al Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $3.75/1M | $0.19/1M |
| Output Cost | $15.00/1M | $0.84/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $6.56/1M | $0.35/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jun 21, 2024 | Jul 31, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 98.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1449ms |
| Latency | — | 1449ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 4.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 30.6 | 36.1 |
| Intelligence | 14.2 | 20.0 |
| Coding | 26.0 | 19.4 |
| Math | — | 29.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 56.0% | 51.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 75.1% | 70.6% |
| HLE | 3.7% | 4.0% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 40.3% |
| MATH 500 | 69.5% | 89.3% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 29.0% |
| AIME (Original) | 9.7% | 29.7% |
| SciCode | 31.6% | 27.8% |
| LCR | — | 29.0% |
| IFBench | — | 32.7% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 34.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 15.2% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct offers the best value at $0.19/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct has the strongest reasoning profile with a 36.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24) reaches a 26.0 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (June '24)
- Code generation
- Software development
Qwen3 Coder 30B A3B Instruct
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
