Model Comparison
Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)
vs. Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct 16 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence
Best Value
Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)
100.0 value score
19.5 reasoning / $0.19/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)
$0.11/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
44.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
24.6 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 1.7B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) is 2.7x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct leads Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) by 25.0 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct leads Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) by 22.3 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct wins 16 measurable categories, including Throughput, Reasoning, Intelligence, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) | Top Pick Al Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.11/1M | $0.30/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.42/1M | $1.80/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.19/1M | $0.68/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Apr 28, 2025 | Jul 22, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 63.9 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1685ms |
| Latency | — | 1685ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 63.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 19.5 | 44.5 |
| Intelligence | 6.8 | 24.8 |
| Coding | 2.3 | 24.6 |
| Math | 7.3 | 39.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 28.3% | 61.8% |
| MMLU Pro | 41.1% | 78.8% |
| HLE | 5.2% | 4.4% |
| LiveCodeBench | 12.6% | 58.5% |
| MATH 500 | 71.7% | 94.2% |
| AIME 2025 | 7.3% | 39.3% |
| AIME (Original) | 9.7% | 47.7% |
| SciCode | 6.9% | 35.9% |
| LCR | 0.0% | 42.3% |
| IFBench | 21.1% | 40.5% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 21.6% | 43.6% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 0.0% | 18.9% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 1.7B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.11/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct has the strongest reasoning profile with a 44.5 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct reaches a 24.6 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 1.7B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3 Coder 480B A35B Instruct
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
