Qwen Plus vs SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 vs Codestral
Qwen Plus comes out ahead, 51 to 35 and 0 on our weighted score, though Codestral is 25% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Plus
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.40 / $1.20
- Context1M
UpstageSOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0
0/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context4K
Mistral AICodestral
35/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $0.90
- Context256K
Qwen Plus is our pick
Qwen Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 51/100 against Codestral (35) and SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 (0). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 priceCodestralCodestral $0.45 · Qwen Plus $0.60 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 unpriced
- Longest contextQwen PlusQwen Plus 1,000,000 · Codestral 256,000 · SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 4,096 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen Plus: Text · SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0: Text · Codestral: Text
- Self-hostingSOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 and CodestralPublishes downloadable weights (CC-BY-NC-4.0)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen Plus | SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 | Codestral |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 45 | 0 | 35 |
| Context window | 40% | 60 | 0 | 36 |
| Overall | 100% | 51/100 | 0/100 | 35/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen PlusAlibaba (Qwen) | SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0Upstage | CodestralMistral AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.40 | — | $0.30 (best) |
| Output | $1.20 | — | $0.90 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.08 | — | $0.03 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.60 | — | $0.45 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Over 256K: $1.20 / $3.60 | — | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | — | Official Mistral API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 4,096 tokens | 256,000 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens (best) | 4,096 tokens | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenCC-BY-NC-4.0 | Open |
| API model ID | qwen-plus | — | codestral-latest |
| API providers | 10 (best) | — | 4 |
| Released | Jan 25, 2024 | Dec 12, 2023 | May 29, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | — | Oct 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen Plus$6.40
- SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0—
- Codestral$4.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen Plus, SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 or Codestral?
Qwen Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 51/100 against Codestral (35) and SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 (0). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Qwen Plus, SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 or Codestral?
Codestral is cheaper at $0.30 input / $0.90 output per million tokens (official Mistral API price). Qwen Plus costs $0.40 input / $1.20 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.45 per million tokens for Codestral versus $0.60 for Qwen Plus (1.3× as much). SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen Plus has not been scored yet, SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 has not been scored yet and Codestral has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen Plus, SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 and Codestral yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 256,000 for Codestral and 4,096 for SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0. Maximum output per response: Qwen Plus up to 32,768, SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 up to 4,096, Codestral up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen Plus accepts text; SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 accepts text; Codestral accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 and Codestral publishes its weights (CC-BY-NC-4.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Codestral is the newest, released May 29, 2024. Qwen Plus came out Jan 25, 2024; SOLAR 10.7B Instruct v1.0 came out Dec 12, 2023. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen Plus Apr 2024, Codestral Oct 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.
