Qwen-VL Max vs Vision Medium vs Sonar
Vision Medium comes out ahead, 84 to 40 and 10 on our weighted score.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-VL Max
40/100- ECI—
- Price$0.80 / $3.20
- Context131K
- Our pick
VisparkVision Medium
84/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1M
PerplexitySonar
10/100- ECI—
- Price$1.00 / $1.00
- Context128K
Vision Medium is our pick
Vision Medium is the better all-round choice, scoring 84/100 against Qwen-VL Max (40) and Sonar (10). 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 priceSonarSonar $1.00 · Qwen-VL Max $1.40 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Vision Medium unpriced
- Longest contextVision MediumVision Medium 1,000,000 · Qwen-VL Max 131,072 · Sonar 128,000 tokens
- Widest inputsVision MediumQwen-VL Max: Text, Images · Vision Medium: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Sonar: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Qwen-VL Max | Vision Medium | Sonar |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 50 | 100 | 0 |
| Context window | 40% | 24 | 60 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 40/100 | 84/100 | 10/100 |
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-VL MaxAlibaba (Qwen) | Vision MediumVispark | SonarPerplexity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.80 (best) | — | $1.00 |
| Output | $3.20 | — | $1.00 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.40 | — | $1.00 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Alibaba API | — | Official Perplexity API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 65,536 tokens (best) | 4,096 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | Yes | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | qwen-vl-max | — | sonar |
| API providers | 3 | — | 6 (best) |
| Released | Apr 8, 2024 | May 15, 2024 | Jan 1, 2024 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 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
- Vision Medium—
- Sonar$12.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen-VL Max, Vision Medium or Sonar?
Vision Medium is the better all-round choice, scoring 84/100 against Qwen-VL Max (40) and Sonar (10). 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-VL Max, Vision Medium or Sonar?
Sonar is cheaper at $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 $1.00 per million tokens for Sonar versus $1.40 for Qwen-VL Max (1.4× as much). Vision Medium has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Qwen-VL Max has not been scored yet, Vision Medium 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, Vision Medium and Sonar yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Sonar does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Vision Medium has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen-VL Max and 128,000 for Sonar. Maximum output per response: Qwen-VL Max up to 8,192, Vision Medium up to 65,536, Sonar up to 4,096 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen-VL Max accepts text and images; Vision Medium accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Sonar accepts text. Vision Medium handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Qwen-VL Max, Vision Medium and Sonar are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Vision Medium is the newest, released May 15, 2024. Qwen-VL Max came out Apr 8, 2024; Sonar came out Jan 1, 2024. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen-VL Max 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.
