Qwen Turbo vs Qwen-VL OCR
Qwen Turbo comes out ahead, 72 to 36 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Turbo
72/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.20
- Context1M
- Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen-VL OCR
36/100- ECI—
- Price$0.72 / $0.72
- Context34K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen Turbo is our pick
Qwen Turbo is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36). It leads on price, 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 TurboQwen Turbo $0.087 · Qwen-VL OCR $0.72 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen TurboQwen Turbo 1,000,000 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen-VL OCRQwen Turbo: Text · Qwen-VL OCR: Text, Images
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Qwen Turbo | Qwen-VL OCR |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 57 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 1 |
| Overall | 100% | 72/100 | 36/100 |
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 TurboAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen-VL OCRAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 41.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 6.1% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.05 (best) | $0.72 |
| Output | $0.20 (best) | $0.72 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.087 (best) | $0.72 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 34,096 tokens |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens (best) | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen-turbo | qwen-vl-ocr |
| API providers | 3 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Nov 1, 2024 | Oct 28, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | Apr 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 Turbo$0.90
- Qwen-VL OCR$8.64
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen Turbo or Qwen-VL OCR?
Qwen Turbo is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36). It leads on price, 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 Turbo or Qwen-VL OCR?
Qwen Turbo is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen-VL OCR costs $0.72 input / $0.72 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.087 per million tokens for Qwen Turbo versus $0.72 for Qwen-VL OCR (8.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen Turbo has not been scored yet and Qwen-VL OCR has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen Turbo and Qwen-VL OCR yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Turbo has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Qwen Turbo up to 16,384, Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen Turbo accepts text; Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images. Qwen-VL OCR handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Qwen Turbo and Qwen-VL OCR are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Qwen Turbo is the newest, released Nov 1, 2024. Qwen-VL OCR came out Oct 28, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen Turbo Apr 2024, Qwen-VL OCR Apr 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 Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Gemma 3 12B ITThree-way comparison
- Qwen Turbo vs Gemma 3 12B ITGoogle · ECI 123.5
- Qwen Turbo vs Claude Haiku 3.5Anthropic · ECI 127.2
- Qwen Turbo vs GPT-4o miniOpenAI · ECI 126.6
- Qwen Turbo vs GLM-4.7-FlashZ.ai (Zhipu)
- Qwen-VL OCR vs Aya Expanse 32BCohere
- Qwen-VL OCR vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B InstructNVIDIA
