Model Comparison
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)
vs. 105B (high)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Alibaba, Sarvam
Recommended Pick
Al Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) 9 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Latency, Reasoning
Best Value
105B (high)
100.0 value score
34.0 reasoning / $0.07/1M
Lowest Price
105B (high)
$0.04/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)
55.4 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)
14.5 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
105B (high) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
105B (high) is 16.7x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning).
Reasoning gap
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) leads 105B (high) by 21.4 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) leads 105B (high) by 4.7 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) wins 9 measurable categories, including Throughput, Latency, Reasoning, Intelligence.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
105B (high)
Sarvam
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick Al Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) | Sa 105B (high) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.70/1M | $0.04/1M |
| Output Cost | $8.40/1M | $0.17/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $2.63/1M | $0.07/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Sarvam |
| Release Date | Oct 21, 2025 | Mar 6, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 96.5 tok/s | 94.5 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1387ms | 1253ms |
| Latency | 22121ms | 22424ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 4.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 55.4 | 34.0 |
| Intelligence | 24.7 | 18.2 |
| Coding | 14.5 | 9.8 |
| Math | 84.7 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 73.3% | 73.8% |
| MMLU Pro | 81.8% | — |
| HLE | 9.6% | 10.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | 73.8% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 84.7% | — |
| SciCode | 28.5% | 26.4% |
| LCR | 55.3% | 0.0% |
| IFBench | 59.4% | 34.4% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 45.6% | 46.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 7.6% | 1.5% |
Key Takeaways
105B (high) offers the best value at $0.04/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 55.4 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) reaches a 14.5 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 VL 32B (Reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
105B (high)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
