Model Comparison

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructWhich is better in 2026?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 is 1.9x cheaper per token.

Verdict: Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct — which is better?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 outperforms in 13 benchmarks (Arena-Hard v2, BFCL-v3, Creative Writing v3, CSimpleQA, IFEval, LiveBench 20241125, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-ProX, MMLU-Redux, Multi-IF, MultiPL-E, SimpleQA, SuperGPQA), while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is better at 5 benchmarks (AIME 2025, HMMT25, Include, LiveCodeBench v6, WritingBench). Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

On price, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 is roughly 1.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Choose Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 13 of 18 shared benchmarks
  • cost matters — it's about 1.9x cheaper per token

Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct if…

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

18 benchmarks

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 outperforms in 13 benchmarks (Arena-Hard v2, BFCL-v3, Creative Writing v3, CSimpleQA, IFEval, LiveBench 20241125, MMLU-Pro, MMLU-ProX, MMLU-Redux, Multi-IF, MultiPL-E, SimpleQA, SuperGPQA), while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is better at 5 benchmarks (AIME 2025, HMMT25, Include, LiveCodeBench v6, WritingBench).

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks.

Tue Jun 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 costs less

For input processing, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 ($0.15/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 ($0.80/1M tokens) is 1.9x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($1.49/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is more expensive than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Jun 16 2026 • llm-stats.com
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.80
Best providerFireworks
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.49
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

1.0B diff

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct has 1.0B more parameters than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507, making it 0.4% larger.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507
235.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
236.0Bparameters
235.0B
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507
236.0B
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Tue Jun 16 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 does not.

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.

Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 was released on 2025-07-22, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct was released on 2025-09-22.

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is 2 months newer than Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507

Jul 22, 2025

10 months ago

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

Sep 22, 2025

8 months ago

2mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 is available from Fireworks, Novita. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Novita.

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507

fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.80/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.80/1M

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.49/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.50/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion

Key Takeaways

Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Higher Arena-Hard v2 score (79.2% vs 77.4%)
Higher BFCL-v3 score (70.9% vs 67.7%)
Higher Creative Writing v3 score (87.5% vs 86.5%)
Higher CSimpleQA score (84.3% vs 83.4%)
Higher IFEval score (88.7% vs 87.8%)
Higher LiveBench 20241125 score (75.4% vs 74.8%)
Higher MMLU-Pro score (83.0% vs 81.8%)
Higher MMLU-ProX score (79.4% vs 77.8%)
Higher MMLU-Redux score (93.1% vs 92.2%)
Higher Multi-IF score (77.5% vs 76.3%)
Higher MultiPL-E score (87.9% vs 86.1%)
Higher SimpleQA score (54.3% vs 51.9%)
Higher SuperGPQA score (62.6% vs 60.4%)
Supports multimodal inputs
Higher AIME 2025 score (74.7% vs 70.3%)
Higher HMMT25 score (57.4% vs 55.4%)
Higher Include score (80.0% vs 79.5%)
Higher LiveCodeBench v6 score (54.3% vs 51.8%)
Higher WritingBench score (85.5% vs 85.2%)

Detailed Comparison

FAQ

Common questions about Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.

Which is better, Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 shows notably better performance in the majority of benchmarks. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 compare to Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct in benchmarks?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 scores ZebraLogic: 95.0%, MMLU-Redux: 93.1%, IFEval: 88.7%, MultiPL-E: 87.9%, Creative Writing v3: 87.5%. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct scores DocVQAtest: 97.1%, ScreenSpot: 95.4%, MMLU-Redux: 92.2%, OCRBench: 92.0%, MMBench-V1.1: 89.9%.

Is Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 cheaper than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 costs $0.15/M input and $0.80/M output via fireworks. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct costs $0.30/M input and $1.49/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct?

Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 supports 262K tokens and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Qwen3-235B-A22B-Instruct-2507 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct?

Key differences include input pricing ($0.15 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.