Model Comparison
Qwen3 30B A3B vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingWhich is better in 2026?
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3 30B A3B is 2.6x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Qwen3 30B A3B vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking — which is better?
Qwen3 30B A3B (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking (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 30B A3B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is better at 3 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, Multi-IF). Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, Qwen3 30B A3B is roughly 2.6x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking also accepts a larger context window (131,072 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Qwen3 30B A3B if…
- cost matters — it's about 2.6x cheaper per token
Choose Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 3 of 3 shared benchmarks
- you process long inputs — it offers a 131,072 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2025
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Qwen3 30B A3B outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is better at 3 benchmarks (AIME 2025, GPQA, Multi-IF).
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Qwen3 30B A3B ($0.10/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking ($0.20/1M tokens).
For output processing, Qwen3 30B A3B ($0.30/1M tokens) is 3.3x cheaper than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking ($0.99/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is more expensive than Qwen3 30B A3B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Model Size
Parameter count comparison
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking has 0.5B more parameters than Qwen3 30B A3B, making it 1.6% larger.
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking accepts 131,072 input tokens compared to Qwen3 30B A3B's 128,000 tokens. Qwen3 30B A3B can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is limited to 32,768 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3 30B A3B does not.
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Qwen3 30B A3B
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under Apache 2.0.
Both models share the same licensing terms, providing consistent usage rights.
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Qwen3 30B A3B was released on 2025-04-29, while Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking was released on 2025-09-22.
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is 5 months newer than Qwen3 30B A3B.
Apr 29, 2025
1.2 years ago
Sep 22, 2025
9 months ago
4mo newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Qwen3 30B A3B is available from DeepInfra, Novita, Fireworks. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is available from Novita, DeepInfra.
Qwen3 30B A3B
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 30B A3B
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
Interactive Arena
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Qwen3 30B A3B and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Qwen3 30B A3B vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking.