LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
LongCat-2.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 24.0. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is 1.4x cheaper per token.
Meituan · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
LongCat-2.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.0 to 24.0, ranking #20 overall.
In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, LongCat-2.5 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is roughly 1.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
LongCat-2.5 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose LongCat-2.5
- overall performance matters — it scores 50.0 and ranks #20 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
- cost matters — it's about 1.4x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
23 reported for LongCat-2.5 · 50 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
LongCat-2.5 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (CharXiv-R, MathVision), while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.
LongCat-2.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, LongCat-2.5 ($0.30/1M tokens) is 1.5x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($0.20/1M tokens).
For output processing, LongCat-2.5 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 1.4x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($0.88/1M tokens).
In conclusion, LongCat-2.5 is more expensive than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
LongCat-2.5 has 1364.0B more parameters than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct, making it 578.0% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
LongCat-2.5 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while LongCat-2.5 is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both LongCat-2.5 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
LongCat-2.5
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
LongCat-2.5 was released on 2026-11-01, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct was released on 2025-09-22.
LongCat-2.5 is 14 months newer than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.
Nov 1, 2026
0 days ago
1.1yr newerSep 22, 2025
1.1 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
LongCat-2.5 is available from Meituan. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Novita.
LongCat-2.5
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against LongCat-2.5 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about LongCat-2.5 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.