Model Comparison
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)
vs. QwQ 32B
Comparing 2 AI models · 12 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)16 metric winsStrongest on: Value, Input price, Throughput
Best Value
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)
100.0 value score
56.5 reasoning / $0.75/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)
$0.20/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)
56.5 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)
12.1 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 2507 (Reasoning) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) is 3.3x cheaper on input tokens than QwQ 32B.
Speed gap
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) generates about 4.3x as many tokens per second as QwQ 32B.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) leads QwQ 32B by 11.9 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) wins 16 measurable categories, including Value, Input price, Throughput, 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 (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
QwQ 32B
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 (Reasoning) | Al QwQ 32B |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.20/1M | $0.66/1M |
| Output Cost | $2.40/1M | $1.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.75/1M | $0.74/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Jul 30, 2025 | Mar 5, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 139.4 tok/s | 32.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1154ms | 481ms |
| Latency | 15499ms | 76435ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 79.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 56.5 | 44.7 |
| Intelligence | 14.4 | 13.4 |
| Coding | 12.1 | — |
| Math | 56.3 | 29.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 70.7% | 59.3% |
| MMLU Pro | 80.5% | 76.4% |
| HLE | 9.8% | 8.2% |
| LiveCodeBench | 70.7% | 63.1% |
| MATH 500 | 97.6% | 95.7% |
| AIME 2025 | 56.3% | 29.0% |
| AIME (Original) | 90.7% | 78.0% |
| SciCode | 33.3% | 35.8% |
| LCR | 59.0% | 25.0% |
| IFBench | 50.7% | 38.8% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 28.1% | — |
| TerminalBench Hard | 5.3% | — |
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) offers the best value at $0.20/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 56.5 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning) reaches a 12.1 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 30B A3B 2507 (Reasoning)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
QwQ 32B
- General-purpose AI
- Versatile applications
