ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking vs Relace Search

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking comes out ahead, 44 to 35 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking

    Released Sep 23, 2025

    44/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.50 / $3.95
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 VL 235B A22B 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

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is our pick

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 44/100 against Relace Search (35). It leads on price and inputs & features. Relace Search wins on 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 priceQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking $1.36 · Relace Search $1.50 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextRelace SearchRelace Search 256,000 · Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingQwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking: Text, Images · Relace Search: Text
  • Self-hostingQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingRelace Search
Price50%4240
Inputs & features30%6025
Context window20%2536
Overall100%44/10035/100

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 VL 235B A22B Thinking vs Relace Search specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)Relace SearchRelace
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.50 (best)$1.00
Output$3.95$3.00 (best)
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$1.36 (best)$1.50
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 5 providersMedian of 3 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Max output32,768 tokens128,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningYesNo
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietary
API model ID——
API providers5 (best)3
ReleasedSep 23, 2025Dec 8, 2025
Knowledge cutoffMar 31, 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 VL 235B A22B Thinking$12.90
  • Relace Search$16.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking or Relace Search?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is the better all-round choice, scoring 44/100 against Relace Search (35). It leads on price and inputs & features. Relace Search wins on 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 VL 235B A22B Thinking or Relace Search?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking is cheaper at $0.50 input / $3.95 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). Relace Search costs $1.00 input / $3.00 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.36 per million tokens for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking versus $1.50 for Relace Search (1.1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B 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 VL 235B A22B 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?

Relace Search has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking. Maximum output per response: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking up to 32,768, Relace Search up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking accepts text and images; Relace Search accepts text. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Qwen3 VL 235B A22B 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 VL 235B A22B Thinking came out Sep 23, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Thinking Mar 31, 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