Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen Flash
Qwen Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 52 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507
52/100- ECI138.9
- Price$0.15 / $0.75
- Context262K
- Our pickAlibaba (Qwen)
Qwen Flash
68/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen Flash is our pick
Qwen Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 (52). 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 FlashQwen Flash $0.138 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 $0.30 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen FlashQwen Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507: Text · Qwen Flash: Text
- Self-hostingQwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507Publishes downloadable weights (Apache 2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 | Qwen Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 75 | 91 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 52/100 | 68/100 |
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 | Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507Alibaba (Qwen) | Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 138.9 | — |
| ECI rank | #105 of 148 | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.15 | $0.05 (best) |
| Output | $0.75 | $0.40 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.30 | $0.138 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 11 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 16,384 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | qwen-flash |
| API providers | 11 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Jul 21, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | 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.
- Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507$3.00
- Qwen Flash$1.30
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 or Qwen Flash?
Qwen Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 (52). 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, Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 or Qwen Flash?
Qwen Flash is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 costs $0.15 input / $0.75 output per million tokens (median across 11 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.138 per million tokens for Qwen Flash versus $0.30 for Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 (2.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 has an ECI of 138.9 and Qwen Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 and Qwen Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 up to 16,384, Qwen Flash up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 accepts text; Qwen Flash accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 publishes its weights (Apache 2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 came out Jul 21, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen Flash 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 GPT OSS 120BThree-way comparison
- Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs GPT OSS 120BOpenAI · ECI 140.0
- Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs DeepSeek-V3.1DeepSeek · ECI 139.9
- Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle · ECI 140.8
- Qwen3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B InstructMeta · ECI 132.2
- Qwen Flash vs Voxtral Small 24B 2507Mistral AI
- Qwen Flash vs Apertus 8BSwiss AI
