Qwen-MT Turbo vs Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B vs Solar Pro 2
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B comes out ahead, 59 to 52 and 40 on our weighted score, though Qwen-MT Turbo is 31% cheaper per token.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-MT Turbo
40/100- ECI—
- Price$0.16 / $0.49
- Context16K
- Our pickAlibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B
59/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $0.80
- Context131K
Upstage
Solar Pro 2
52/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $0.25
- Context66K
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is our pick
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Solar Pro 2 (52) and Qwen-MT Turbo (40). It leads on 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 priceQwen-MT TurboQwen-MT Turbo $0.242 · Solar Pro 2 $0.25 · Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B $0.35 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3-VL 30B-A3BQwen3-VL 30B-A3B 131,072 · Solar Pro 2 65,536 · Qwen-MT Turbo 16,384 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen3-VL 30B-A3BQwen-MT Turbo: Text · Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B: Text, Images · Solar Pro 2: Text
- Self-hostingQwen3-VL 30B-A3BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Qwen-MT Turbo | Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B | Solar Pro 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 79 | 72 | 78 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 0 | 60 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 0 | 24 | 12 |
| Overall | 100% | 40/100 | 59/100 | 52/100 |
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 | Qwen-MT TurboAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen3-VL 30B-A3BAlibaba (Qwen) | Solar Pro 2Upstage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.16 (best) | $0.20 | $0.25 |
| Output | $0.49 | $0.80 | $0.25 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.242 (best) | $0.35 | $0.25 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API | Official Upstage API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 16,384 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | Yesminimal · high |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen-mt-turbo | qwen3-vl-30b-a3b | solar-pro2 |
| API providers | 1 | 1 | 2 (best) |
| Released | Jan 2025 | Apr 2025 | May 20, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | Apr 2025 | Mar 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen-MT Turbo$2.58
- Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B$3.60
- Solar Pro 2$3.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen-MT Turbo, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B or Solar Pro 2?
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B is the better all-round choice, scoring 59/100 against Solar Pro 2 (52) and Qwen-MT Turbo (40). It leads on 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, Qwen-MT Turbo, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B or Solar Pro 2?
Qwen-MT Turbo is cheaper at $0.16 input / $0.49 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Solar Pro 2 costs $0.25 input / $0.25 output per million tokens (official Upstage API price); Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B costs $0.20 input / $0.80 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.242 per million tokens for Qwen-MT Turbo versus $0.25 for Solar Pro 2 (1× as much) and $0.35 for Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen-MT Turbo has not been scored yet, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B has not been scored yet and Solar Pro 2 has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen-MT Turbo, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B and Solar Pro 2 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-MT Turbo does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 65,536 for Solar Pro 2 and 16,384 for Qwen-MT Turbo. Maximum output per response: Qwen-MT Turbo up to 8,192, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B up to 32,768, Solar Pro 2 up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen-MT Turbo accepts text; Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B accepts text and images; Solar Pro 2 accepts text. Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen-MT Turbo and Solar Pro 2 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Solar Pro 2 is the newest, released May 20, 2025. Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B came out Apr 2025; Qwen-MT Turbo came out Jan 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-MT Turbo Apr 2024, Qwen3-VL 30B-A3B Apr 2025, Solar Pro 2 Mar 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 Oct 4, 2026.
