ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

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

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. Our pick

    Upstage

    solar-mini

    Released Jun 12, 2024

    50/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.15 / $0.15
    • Context33K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

    Released Sep 23, 2025

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.50 / $3.95
    • Context131K
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 · solar-mini: Text · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: Text, Images
  • Self-hostingHermes 4 405B and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightHermes 4 405Bsolar-miniQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking
Price50%408542
Inputs & features30%352560
Context window20%25025
Overall100%35/10050/10044/100

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 solar-mini vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking specifications side by side
SpecificationHermes 4 405BNous Researchsolar-miniUpstageQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$1.00$0.15 (best)$0.50
Output$3.00$0.15 (best)$3.95
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$1.50$0.15 (best)$1.36
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 5 providersOfficial Upstage APIMedian of 5 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Max output117,964 tokens (best)4,096 tokens32,768 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model ID—solar-mini—
API providers5 (best)15 (best)
ReleasedAug 26, 2025Jun 12, 2024Sep 23, 2025
Knowledge cutoffAug 31, 2024Sep 2024Mar 31, 2025
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
  • solar-mini$1.80
  • Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking$12.90
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

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

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, solar-mini or Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking?

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, solar-mini has not been scored yet and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Hermes 4 405B, solar-mini and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 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, solar-mini up to 4,096, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking up to 32,768 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Hermes 4 405B accepts text; solar-mini accepts text; Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking accepts text and images. 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, solar-mini Sep 2024, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking Mar 31, 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.