ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 30B A3B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash comes out ahead, 66 to 57 on our weighted score, though Qwen3 30B A3B is 4.3× cheaper per token.

  1. 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
  2. Our pick

    Google

    Gemini 2.5 Flash

    Released Jun 17, 2025

    66/100
    • ECI140.6
    • Price$0.30 / $2.50
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Gemini 2.5 Flash

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Gemini 2.5 Flash is our pick

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Qwen3 30B A3B (57). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 30B A3B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityGemini 2.5 FlashCapabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6 · Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2
  • Lowest priceQwen3 30B A3BQwen3 30B A3B $0.20 · Gemini 2.5 Flash $0.85 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextGemini 2.5 FlashGemini 2.5 Flash 1,048,576 · Qwen3 30B A3B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsGemini 2.5 FlashQwen3 30B A3B: Text · Gemini 2.5 Flash: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
  • Self-hostingQwen3 30B A3BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 30B A3BGemini 2.5 Flash
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%5965
Price25%8051
Inputs & features15%35100
Context window10%2561
Overall100%57/10066/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3 30B A3B vs Gemini 2.5 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 30B A3BAlibaba (Qwen)Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)136.2140.6 (best)
ECI rank#126 of 165#110 of 165 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions61.7%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics62.8%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.108 (best)$0.30
Output$0.475 (best)$2.50
Cached input—$0.03
Blended (3:1)$0.20 (best)$0.85
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 14 providersOfficial Google API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output16,384 tokens65,536 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoYes
PDFsNoYes
AudioNoYes
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID—gemini-2.5-flash
API providers1432 (best)
ReleasedApr 28, 2025Jun 17, 2025
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 2025
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$2.03
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash$8.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 30B A3B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 66/100 against Qwen3 30B A3B (57). It leads on capability, inputs & features and context window. Qwen3 30B A3B wins on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B A3B or Gemini 2.5 Flash?

Qwen3 30B A3B is cheaper at $0.108 input / $0.475 output per million tokens (median across 14 API providers). Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 input / $2.50 output per million tokens (official Google API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Qwen3 30B A3B versus $0.85 for Gemini 2.5 Flash (4.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Gemini 2.5 Flash scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Gemini 2.5 Flash 140.6 (#110 of 165) and Qwen3 30B A3B 136.2 (#126 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (138.4–142.1 vs 130.8–138.5), so treat the gap as small.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3 30B A3B and Gemini 2.5 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Gemini 2.5 Flash 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?

Gemini 2.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 30B A3B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 30B A3B up to 16,384, Gemini 2.5 Flash up to 65,536 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 30B A3B accepts text; Gemini 2.5 Flash accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 2.5 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 30B A3B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Gemini 2.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Gemini 2.5 Flash is the newest, released Jun 17, 2025. Qwen3 30B A3B came out Apr 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Gemini 2.5 Flash Jan 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