ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) vs Relace Search

Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) 35, Relace Search 35). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)

    Released Sep 2025Deprecated

    35/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.50 / $6.00
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)

  2. Relace

    Relace Search

    Released Dec 8, 2025

    35/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$1.00 / $3.00
    • Context256K
    Full specs Remove Relace Search

  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 a point (Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) 35/100, Relace Search 35/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Relace Search on price and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) for long inputs. 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 priceRelace SearchRelace Search $1.50 · Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) $1.88 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) 262,144 · Relace Search 256,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking): Text · Relace Search: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)Relace Search
Price50%3540
Inputs & features30%3525
Context window20%3736
Overall100%35/10035/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. 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-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) vs Relace Search specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)Alibaba (Qwen)Relace SearchRelace
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.50 (best)$1.00
Output$6.00$3.00 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$1.88$1.50 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens (best)256,000 tokens
Max output32,768 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model IDqwen3-next-80b-a3b-thinking—
API providers7 (best)3
ReleasedSep 2025Dec 8, 2025
Knowledge cutoffApr 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-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking)$17.00
  • Relace Search$16.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) or Relace Search?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) 35/100, Relace Search 35/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Relace Search on price and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) for long inputs. 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-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) or Relace Search?

Relace Search is cheaper at $1.00 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) costs $0.50 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.50 per million tokens for Relace Search versus $1.88 for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) has not been scored yet and Relace Search has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) and Relace Search 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?

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 256,000 for Relace Search. Maximum output per response: Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) up to 32,768, Relace Search up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) accepts text; Relace Search accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Relace Search is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Relace Search is the newest, released Dec 8, 2025. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) came out Sep 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B (Thinking) Apr 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