ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Jamba Large vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen MT Plus

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 comes out ahead, 42 to 29 and 11 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. AI21 Labs

    Jamba Large

    Released Jul 3, 2025

    29/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$2.00 / $8.00
    • Context256K
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507

    Released Jul 25, 2025

    42/100
    • ECI143.8
    • Price$0.30 / $2.90
    • Context262K
  3. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen MT Plus

    Released Jul 24, 2025

    11/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$2.46 / $7.37
    • Context16K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 is our pick

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 is the better all-round choice, scoring 42/100 against Jamba Large (29) and Qwen MT Plus (11). It leads on price. 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 priceQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 $0.95 · Jamba Large $3.50 · Qwen MT Plus $3.69 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 262,144 · Jamba Large 256,000 · Qwen MT Plus 16,384 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsJamba Large: Text · Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507: Text · Qwen MT Plus: Text
  • Self-hostingJamba Large and Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Publishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightJamba LargeQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Qwen MT Plus
Price50%234922
Inputs & features30%35350
Context window20%36370
Overall100%29/10042/10011/100

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.

Jamba Large vs Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen MT Plus specifications side by side
SpecificationJamba LargeAI21 LabsQwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen MT PlusAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—143.8—
ECI rank—#93 of 165—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—80.1%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—86.7%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—40.4%—
Price per million tokens
Input$2.00$0.30 (best)$2.46
Output$8.00$2.90 (best)$7.37
Cached input———
Blended (3:1)$3.50$0.95 (best)$3.69
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial AI21 Labs APIMedian of 11 providersOfficial Alibaba API
Limits
Context window256,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)16,384 tokens
Max output4,096 tokens81,920 tokens (best)8,192 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoNoNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoNo
ReasoningNoYesNo
Tool callingYesYesNo
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenApache 2.0Proprietary
API model IDjamba-large—qwen-mt-plus
API providers112 (best)3
ReleasedJul 3, 2025Jul 25, 2025Jul 24, 2025
Knowledge cutoffAug 22, 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.

  • Jamba Large$36.00
  • Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507$8.80
  • Qwen MT Plus$39.34
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Jamba Large, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen MT Plus?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 is the better all-round choice, scoring 42/100 against Jamba Large (29) and Qwen MT Plus (11). It leads on price. 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, Jamba Large, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 or Qwen MT Plus?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.90 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). Jamba Large costs $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official AI21 Labs API price); 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 $0.95 per million tokens for Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 versus $3.50 for Jamba Large (3.7× as much) and $3.69 for Qwen MT Plus (3.9× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Jamba Large has not been scored yet, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 has an ECI of 143.8 and Qwen MT Plus has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Jamba Large, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 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?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 256,000 for Jamba Large and 16,384 for Qwen MT Plus. Maximum output per response: Jamba Large up to 4,096, Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 up to 81,920, Qwen MT Plus up to 8,192 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Jamba Large accepts text; Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 accepts text; Qwen MT Plus accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Jamba Large and Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen MT Plus is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 235B-A22B Thinking 2507 is the newest, released Jul 25, 2025. Qwen MT Plus came out Jul 24, 2025; Jamba Large came out Jul 3, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Jamba Large Aug 22, 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.