Apertus 70B vs Qwen MT Plus
Apertus 70B comes out ahead, 32 to 11 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Swiss AI
Apertus 70B
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.82 / $2.42
- Context66K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen MT Plus
11/100- ECI—
- Price$2.46 / $7.37
- Context16K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Apertus 70B is our pick
Apertus 70B is the better all-round choice, scoring 32/100 against Qwen MT Plus (11). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. 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 · Qwen MT Plus $3.69 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextApertus 70BApertus 70B 65,536 · Qwen MT Plus 16,384 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsApertus 70B: Text · Qwen MT Plus: Text
- Self-hostingApertus 70BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 70B | Qwen MT Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 44 | 22 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 0 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 32/100 | 11/100 |
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 | Qwen MT PlusAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.82 (best) | $2.46 |
| Output | $2.42 (best) | $7.37 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.22 (best) | $3.69 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | qwen-mt-plus |
| API providers | 3 | 3 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Jul 24, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 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
- Qwen MT Plus$39.34
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 70B or Qwen MT Plus?
Apertus 70B is the better all-round choice, scoring 32/100 against Qwen MT Plus (11). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. 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 or Qwen MT Plus?
Apertus 70B is cheaper at $0.82 input / $2.42 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Qwen MT Plus costs $2.46 input / $7.37 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.22 per million tokens for Apertus 70B versus $3.69 for Qwen MT Plus (3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Apertus 70B has not been scored yet and Qwen MT Plus has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 70B and Qwen MT Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen MT Plus does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Apertus 70B has the largest context window at 65,536 tokens, against 16,384 for Qwen MT Plus. Maximum output per response: Apertus 70B up to 8,192, Qwen MT Plus up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 70B accepts text; Qwen MT Plus accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Apertus 70B publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen MT Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Apertus 70B is the newest, released Sep 2, 2025. Qwen MT Plus came out Jul 24, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 70B Sep 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.
