Model Comparison
Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) 19 metric wins Strongest on: Value, Input price, Blended price
Best Value
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
57.1 reasoning / $0.18/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
$0.09/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
57.1 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
11.0 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 30B A3B (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) is 1.2x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) leads Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning) by 41.6 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) leads Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning) by 9.6 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) wins 19 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Blended price, Throughput.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Al Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.11/1M | $0.09/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.42/1M | $0.45/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.19/1M | $0.18/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 28, 2025 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 78.0 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1233ms |
| Latency | — | 26885ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 26.0 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 15.5 | 57.1 |
| Intelligence | 5.7 | 15.3 |
| Coding | 1.4 | 11.0 |
| Math | 10.3 | 72.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 23.1% | 61.6% |
| MMLU Pro | 23.1% | 77.7% |
| HLE | 5.2% | 6.6% |
| LiveCodeBench | 7.3% | 50.6% |
| MATH 500 | 52.1% | 95.9% |
| AIME 2025 | 10.3% | 72.3% |
| AIME (Original) | 1.7% | 75.3% |
| SciCode | 4.1% | 28.5% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 21.9% | 41.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 14.6% | 26.0% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 0.0% | 2.3% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.09/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 57.1 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning) reaches a 11.0 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
Qwen3 0.6B (Non-reasoning)
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
Qwen3 30B A3B (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
