Apertus 70B vs Hermes 4 405B vs Qwen3 Max Preview
Too close to call on our weighted score (Hermes 4 405B 35, Qwen3 Max Preview 33, Apertus 70B 32). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Swiss AI
Apertus 70B
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.82 / $2.42
- Context66K
Nous ResearchHermes 4 405B
35/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $3.00
- Context131K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 Max Preview
33/100- ECI—
- Price$0.975 / $4.14
- Context262K
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Hermes 4 405B 35/100, Qwen3 Max Preview 33/100, Apertus 70B 32/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Apertus 70B on price and Qwen3 Max Preview for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceApertus 70BApertus 70B $1.22 · Hermes 4 405B $1.50 · Qwen3 Max Preview $1.77 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3 Max PreviewQwen3 Max Preview 262,144 · Hermes 4 405B 131,072 · Apertus 70B 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsApertus 70B: Text · Hermes 4 405B: Text · Qwen3 Max Preview: Text
- Self-hostingApertus 70B and Hermes 4 405BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 70B | Hermes 4 405B | Qwen3 Max Preview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 44 | 40 | 37 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 25 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 32/100 | 35/100 | 33/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 70BSwiss AI | Hermes 4 405BNous Research | Qwen3 Max PreviewAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.82 (best) | $1.00 | $0.975 |
| Output | $2.42 (best) | $3.00 | $4.14 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.22 (best) | $1.50 | $1.77 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Median of 5 providers | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 117,964 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — | — |
| API providers | 3 | 5 (best) | 2 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Aug 26, 2025 | Sep 5, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | Aug 31, 2024 | Apr 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 70B$13.04
- Hermes 4 405B$16.00
- Qwen3 Max Preview$18.03
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 70B, Hermes 4 405B or Qwen3 Max Preview?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Hermes 4 405B 35/100, Qwen3 Max Preview 33/100, Apertus 70B 32/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Apertus 70B on price and Qwen3 Max Preview for long inputs. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 70B, Hermes 4 405B or Qwen3 Max Preview?
Apertus 70B is cheaper at $0.82 input / $2.42 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Hermes 4 405B costs $1.00 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers); Qwen3 Max Preview costs $0.975 input / $4.14 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.22 per million tokens for Apertus 70B versus $1.50 for Hermes 4 405B (1.2× as much) and $1.77 for Qwen3 Max Preview (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Apertus 70B has not been scored yet, Hermes 4 405B has not been scored yet and Qwen3 Max Preview has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 70B, Hermes 4 405B and Qwen3 Max Preview yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3 Max Preview has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Hermes 4 405B and 65,536 for Apertus 70B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 70B up to 8,192, Hermes 4 405B up to 117,964, Qwen3 Max Preview up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 70B accepts text; Hermes 4 405B accepts text; Qwen3 Max Preview accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Apertus 70B and Hermes 4 405B publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen3 Max Preview is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3 Max Preview is the newest, released Sep 5, 2025. Apertus 70B came out Sep 2, 2025; Hermes 4 405B came out Aug 26, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 70B Sep 2025, Hermes 4 405B Aug 31, 2024, Qwen3 Max Preview Apr 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
