Qwen-VL Max vs Qwen-VL OCR vs Sonar
Qwen-VL Max comes out ahead, 41 to 36 and 30 on our weighted score, though Qwen-VL OCR is 49% cheaper per token.
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-VL Max
41/100- ECI—
- Price$0.80 / $3.20
- Context131K
- Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen-VL OCR
36/100- ECI—
- Price$0.72 / $0.72
- Context34K
PerplexitySonar
30/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $1.00
- Context128K
Qwen-VL Max is our pick
Qwen-VL Max is the better all-round choice, scoring 41/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36) and Sonar (30). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen-VL OCR wins 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 priceQwen-VL OCRQwen-VL OCR $0.72 · Sonar $1.00 · Qwen-VL Max $1.40 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen-VL MaxQwen-VL Max 131,072 · Sonar 128,000 · Qwen-VL OCR 34,096 tokens
- Widest inputsQwen-VL Max and Qwen-VL OCRQwen-VL Max: Text, Images · Qwen-VL OCR: Text, Images · Sonar: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Qwen-VL Max | Qwen-VL OCR | Sonar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 43 | 57 | 50 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 50 | 25 | 0 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 1 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 41/100 | 36/100 | 30/100 |
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-VL MaxAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen-VL OCRAlibaba (Qwen) | SonarPerplexity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.80 | $0.72 (best) | $1.00 |
| Output | $3.20 | $0.72 (best) | $1.00 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.40 | $0.72 (best) | $1.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API | Official Perplexity API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens (best) | 34,096 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens (best) | 4,096 tokens | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | No | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen-vl-max | qwen-vl-ocr | sonar |
| API providers | 3 | 1 | 6 (best) |
| Released | Apr 8, 2024 | Oct 28, 2024 | Jan 1, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Apr 2024 | Apr 2024 | Sep 1, 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-VL Max$14.40
- Qwen-VL OCR$8.64
- Sonar$12.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen-VL Max, Qwen-VL OCR or Sonar?
Qwen-VL Max is the better all-round choice, scoring 41/100 against Qwen-VL OCR (36) and Sonar (30). It leads on inputs & features. Qwen-VL OCR wins 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, Qwen-VL Max, Qwen-VL OCR or Sonar?
Qwen-VL OCR is cheaper at $0.72 input / $0.72 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Sonar costs $1.00 input / $1.00 output per million tokens (official Perplexity API price); Qwen-VL Max costs $0.80 input / $3.20 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.72 per million tokens for Qwen-VL OCR versus $1.00 for Sonar (1.4× as much) and $1.40 for Qwen-VL Max (1.9× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen-VL Max has not been scored yet, Qwen-VL OCR has not been scored yet and Sonar has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen-VL Max, Qwen-VL OCR and Sonar yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Qwen-VL OCR and Sonar does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen-VL Max has the largest context window at 131,072 tokens, against 128,000 for Sonar and 34,096 for Qwen-VL OCR. Maximum output per response: Qwen-VL Max up to 8,192, Qwen-VL OCR up to 4,096, Sonar up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen-VL Max accepts text and images; Qwen-VL OCR accepts text and images; Sonar accepts text. Qwen-VL Max handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Qwen-VL Max, Qwen-VL OCR and Sonar are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Qwen-VL OCR is the newest, released Oct 28, 2024. Qwen-VL Max came out Apr 8, 2024; Sonar came out Jan 1, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-VL Max Apr 2024, Qwen-VL OCR Apr 2024, Sonar Sep 1, 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.
