Model Comparison
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct
vs. Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct18 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Throughput, TTFT
Best Value
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct
100.0 value score
54.9 reasoning / $0.35/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning)
$0.18/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct
54.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
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 2507 Instruct has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning) is 1.1x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct.
Speed gap
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct generates about 2.5x as many tokens per second as Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct leads Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning) by 25.1 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct wins 18 measurable categories, including Value, Throughput, TTFT, Latency.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Al Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct | Al Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.20/1M | $0.18/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.80/1M | $0.70/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.35/1M | $0.31/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jul 29, 2025 | Apr 28, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 152.8 tok/s | 61.2 tok/s |
| TTFT | 971ms | 1407ms |
| Latency | 971ms | 1407ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 61.3 |
| Reasoning Score | 54.9 | 29.8 |
| Intelligence | 9.1 | 5.1 |
| Math | 66.3 | 24.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 65.9% | 45.2% |
| MMLU Pro | 77.7% | 64.3% |
| HLE | 6.8% | 2.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 51.5% | 20.2% |
| MATH 500 | 97.5% | 82.8% |
| AIME 2025 | 66.3% | 24.3% |
| AIME (Original) | 72.7% | 24.3% |
| SciCode | 30.4% | 16.8% |
| LCR | 22.7% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 33.1% | 28.6% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 10.2% | 24.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 6.1% | 2.3% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning) offers the best value at $0.18/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct has the strongest reasoning profile with a 54.9 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 Instruct
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Qwen3 8B (Non-reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
