ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Hermes 4 405B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking vs solar-mini

solar-mini comes out ahead, 50 to 44 and 35 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Nous Research

    Hermes 4 405B

    Released Aug 26, 2025

    35/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.00 / $3.00
    • Context131K
  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

    Released Sep 23, 2025

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.50 / $3.95
    • Context131K
  3. Our pick

    Upstage

    solar-mini

    Released Jun 12, 2024

    50/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.15
    • Context33K
01 — Verdict

solar-mini is our pick

solar-mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 50/100 against Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (44) and Hermes 4 405B (35). It leads on price. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking wins on inputs & features. 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 pricesolar-minisolar-mini $0.15 · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking $1.36 · Hermes 4 405B $1.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextHermes 4 405B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingHermes 4 405B 131,072 · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 131,072 · solar-mini 32,768 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingHermes 4 405B: Text · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: Text, Images · solar-mini: Text
  • Self-hostingHermes 4 405B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightHermes 4 405BQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinkingsolar-mini
Price50%404285
Inputs & features30%356025
Context window20%25250
Overall100%35/10044/10050/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Hermes 4 405B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking vs solar-mini specifications side by side
SpecificationHermes 4 405BNous ResearchQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)solar-miniUpstage
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$0.50$0.15 (best)
Output$3.00$3.95$0.15 (best)
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$1.50$1.36$0.15 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 5 providersMedian of 5 providersOfficial Upstage API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens (best)131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens
Max output117,964 tokens (best)32,768 tokens4,096 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesYesNo
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenProprietary
API model ID——solar-mini
API providers5 (best)5 (best)1
ReleasedAug 26, 2025Sep 23, 2025Jun 12, 2024
Knowledge cutoffAug 31, 2024Mar 31, 2025Sep 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.

  • Hermes 4 405B$16.00
  • Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking$12.90
  • solar-mini$1.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Hermes 4 405B, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking or solar-mini?

solar-mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 50/100 against Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (44) and Hermes 4 405B (35). It leads on price. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking wins on inputs & features. 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, Hermes 4 405B, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking or solar-mini?

solar-mini is cheaper at $0.15 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price). Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking costs $0.50 input / $3.95 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers); Hermes 4 405B costs $1.00 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for solar-mini versus $1.36 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking (9.1× as much) and $1.50 for Hermes 4 405B (10× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Hermes 4 405B has not been scored yet, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking has not been scored yet and solar-mini has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Hermes 4 405B, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking and solar-mini 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?

Hermes 4 405B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking have the largest context windows (131,072 and 131,072 tokens), against 32,768 for solar-mini. Maximum output per response: Hermes 4 405B up to 117,964, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking up to 32,768, solar-mini up to 4,096 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Hermes 4 405B accepts text; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking accepts text and images; solar-mini accepts text. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Hermes 4 405B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; solar-mini is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is the newest, released Sep 23, 2025. Hermes 4 405B came out Aug 26, 2025; solar-mini came out Jun 12, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Hermes 4 405B Aug 31, 2024, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking Mar 31, 2025, solar-mini Sep 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.