ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Qwen3 30B A3B

Gemini 2.0 Flash comes out ahead, 67 to 57 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.0 Flash

    Released Dec 11, 2024

    67/100
    • ECI134.7
    • Price$0.10 / $0.42
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.0 Flash

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B A3B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI136.2
    • Price$0.108 / $0.475
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B A3B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.0 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Qwen3 30B A3B (57). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 30B A3B wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3 30B A3BCapabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 · Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7
  • Lowest priceGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash $0.18 · Qwen3 30B A3B $0.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3 30B A3B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.0 FlashGemini 2.0 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Qwen3 30B A3B: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3 30B A3BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGemini 2.0 FlashQwen3 30B A3B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5859
Price25%8280
Inputs & features15%8035
Context window10%6125
Overall100%67/10057/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Gemini 2.0 Flash vs Qwen3 30B A3B specifications side by side
SpecificationGemini 2.0 FlashGoogleQwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)134.7136.2 (best)
ECI rank#130 of 165#126 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions64.1% (best)61.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics31.1%62.8% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.108
Output$0.42 (best)$0.475
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.18 (best)$0.20
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 14 providers
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output8,192 tokens16,384 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsYesNo
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model ID——
API providers214 (best)
ReleasedDec 11, 2024Apr 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoffJun 2024—
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Gemini 2.0 Flash$1.84
  • Qwen3 30B A3B$2.03
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Gemini 2.0 Flash or Qwen3 30B A3B?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 67/100 against Qwen3 30B A3B (57). It leads on price, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 30B A3B wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.0 Flash or Qwen3 30B A3B?

Gemini 2.0 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.42 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Qwen3 30B A3B costs $0.108 input / $0.475 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.18 per million tokens for Gemini 2.0 Flash versus $0.20 for Qwen3 30B A3B (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3 30B A3B scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 (#126 of 165) and Gemini 2.0 Flash 134.7 (#130 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (130.8–138.5 vs 131.4–136.5), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 2.0 Flash 64.1%, Qwen3 30B A3B 61.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 30B A3B 62.8%, Gemini 2.0 Flash 31.1%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Gemini 2.0 Flash and Qwen3 30B A3B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 30B A3B leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 2.0 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 30B A3B. Maximum output per response: Gemini 2.0 Flash up to 8,192, Qwen3 30B A3B up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Gemini 2.0 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Qwen3 30B A3B accepts text. Gemini 2.0 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 30B A3B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.0 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 30B A3B is the newest, released Apr 28, 2025. Gemini 2.0 Flash came out Dec 11, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.0 Flash Jun 2024.

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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons