ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 30B A3B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 59, Qwen3 30B A3B 57). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    59/100
    • ECI137.3
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B A3B

    Released Apr 28, 2025

    57/100
    • ECI136.2
    • Price$0.108 / $0.475
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B A3B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 59/100, Qwen3 30B A3B 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 137.3 · Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2
  • Lowest priceQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 $0.15 · Qwen3 30B A3B $0.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 262,144 · Qwen3 30B A3B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507: Text · Qwen3 30B A3B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 30B A3B
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%6159
Price25%8580
Inputs & features15%2535
Context window10%3725
Overall100%59/10057/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 vs Qwen3 30B A3B specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen)
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)137.3 (best)136.2
ECI rank#124 of 165 (best)#126 of 165
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions55.6%61.7% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics62.2%62.8% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10 (best)$0.108
Output$0.30 (best)$0.475
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.15 (best)$0.20
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 12 providersMedian of 14 providers
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output16,384 tokens16,384 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenApache 2.0Open
API model ID——
API providers1414
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Apr 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507$1.60
  • Qwen3 30B A3B$2.03
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 or Qwen3 30B A3B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 59/100, Qwen3 30B A3B 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 for raw capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 or Qwen3 30B A3B?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (median across 12 API providers). Qwen3 30B A3B costs $0.108 input / $0.475 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 versus $0.20 for Qwen3 30B A3B (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 137.3 (#124 of 165) and Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 (#126 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (131.7–139.4 vs 130.8–138.5), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3 30B A3B 61.7%, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 55.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Qwen3 30B A3B 62.8%, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 62.2%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 and Qwen3 30B A3B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 30B A3B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 up to 16,384, Qwen3 30B A3B up to 16,384 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 accepts text; Qwen3 30B A3B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights (Apache 2.0), so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Qwen3 30B A3B came out Apr 28, 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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons