ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 vs Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct

Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct comes out ahead, 60 to 49 on our weighted score.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507

    Released Jul 28, 2025

    49/100
    • ECI137.3
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507
  2. Our pick

    ByteDance Seed

    Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct

    Released Aug 20, 2025

    60/100
    • ECI—
    • Price—
    • Context524K
    Full specs Remove Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct is our pick

Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 (49). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025), because Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct has no Capabilities Index score yet.

  • CapabilitySeed-OSS-36B-InstructShared benchmarks: Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct 69.5% · Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 58.9%
  • Lowest priceQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 $0.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct unpriced
  • Longest contextSeed-OSS-36B-InstructSeed-OSS-36B-Instruct 524,288 · Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 262,144 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507: Text · Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct: 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 2507Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct
CapabilityShared benchmarks67%5970
Inputs & features20%2535
Context window13%3749
Overall100%49/10060/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: price. The remaining weights were rescaled.

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 Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507Alibaba (Qwen)Seed-OSS-36B-InstructByteDance Seed
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)137.3—
ECI rank#124 of 165—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions55.6%71.5% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics62.2%67.5% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$0.10—
Output$0.30—
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.15—
Long-context rateSame rate—
Price sourceMedian of 12 providers—
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens524,288 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens524,288 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenApache 2.0OpenApache 2.0
API model ID——
API providers14—
ReleasedJul 28, 2025Aug 20, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Jul 2024
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
  • Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct—
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 or Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct?

Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct is the better all-round choice, scoring 60/100 against Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 (49). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. The score weighs capability 67%, inputs & features 20%, context window 13%. Capability uses the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025), because Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct has no Capabilities Index score yet.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 or Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (median across 12 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 . Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct has no published per-token price.

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Not every model here has a Capabilities Index score, so we compare the average of shared benchmarks (GPQA Diamond and OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025): Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct 69.5% and Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 58.9%. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct 71.5%, Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 55.6%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct 67.5%, 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 Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct 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?

Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct has the largest context window at 524,288 tokens, against 262,144 for Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 up to 16,384, Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct up to 524,288 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 accepts text; Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct 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?

Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct is the newest, released Aug 20, 2025. Qwen3 30B-A3B Instruct 2507 came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct Jul 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 Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons