Sonar Deep Research vs Step 2 (16K) vs Qwen-MT Plus
Sonar Deep Research comes out ahead, 20 to 12 and 11 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
PerplexitySonar Deep Research
20/100- ECI—
- Price$2.00 / $8.00
- Context128K
StepFunStep 2 (16K)
11/100- ECI—
- Price$5.21 / $16.44
- Context16K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen-MT Plus
12/100- ECI—
- Price$2.46 / $7.37
- Context16K
Sonar Deep Research is our pick
Sonar Deep Research is the better all-round choice, scoring 20/100 against Qwen-MT Plus (12) and Step 2 (16K) (11). It leads on context window. Step 2 (16K) wins on inputs & features. 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 priceSonar Deep ResearchSonar Deep Research $3.50 · Qwen-MT Plus $3.69 · Step 2 (16K) $8.02 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextSonar Deep ResearchSonar Deep Research 128,000 · Step 2 (16K) 16,384 · Qwen-MT Plus 16,384 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsSonar Deep Research: Text · Step 2 (16K): Text · Qwen-MT Plus: Text
- Self-hostingNo open weightsAll three are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Sonar Deep Research | Step 2 (16K) | Qwen-MT Plus |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 24 | 7 | 23 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 10 | 25 | 0 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 0 | 0 |
| Overall | 100% | 20/100 | 11/100 | 12/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Sonar Deep ResearchPerplexity | Step 2 (16K)StepFun | Qwen-MT PlusAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $2.00 (best) | $5.21 | $2.46 |
| Output | $8.00 | $16.44 | $7.37 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $1.04 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $3.50 (best) | $8.02 | $3.69 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Perplexity API | Official StepFun (Global) API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 128,000 tokens (best) | 16,384 tokens | 16,384 tokens |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens (best) | 8,192 tokens | 8,192 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high | No | No |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | No |
| Structured output | No | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | sonar-deep-research | step-2-16k | qwen-mt-plus |
| API providers | 3 (best) | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Feb 1, 2025 | Jan 1, 2025 | Jan 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 2025 | Jun 2024 | Apr 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Sonar Deep Research$36.00
- Step 2 (16K)$84.98
- Qwen-MT Plus$39.34
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Sonar Deep Research, Step 2 (16K) or Qwen-MT Plus?
Sonar Deep Research is the better all-round choice, scoring 20/100 against Qwen-MT Plus (12) and Step 2 (16K) (11). It leads on context window. Step 2 (16K) wins on inputs & features. 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, Sonar Deep Research, Step 2 (16K) or Qwen-MT Plus?
Sonar Deep Research is cheaper at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per million tokens (official Perplexity API price). Qwen-MT Plus costs $2.46 input / $7.37 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); Step 2 (16K) costs $5.21 input / $16.44 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $3.50 per million tokens for Sonar Deep Research versus $3.69 for Qwen-MT Plus (1.1× as much) and $8.02 for Step 2 (16K) (2.3× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Sonar Deep Research has not been scored yet, Step 2 (16K) has not been scored yet and Qwen-MT Plus has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Sonar Deep Research, Step 2 (16K) and Qwen-MT Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Sonar Deep Research and Qwen-MT Plus does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Sonar Deep Research has the largest context window at 128,000 tokens, against 16,384 for Step 2 (16K) and 16,384 for Qwen-MT Plus. Maximum output per response: Sonar Deep Research up to 32,768, Step 2 (16K) up to 8,192, Qwen-MT Plus up to 8,192 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Sonar Deep Research accepts text; Step 2 (16K) accepts text; Qwen-MT Plus accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
No. Sonar Deep Research, Step 2 (16K) and Qwen-MT Plus are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Sonar Deep Research is the newest, released Feb 1, 2025. Step 2 (16K) came out Jan 1, 2025; Qwen-MT Plus came out Jan 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Sonar Deep Research Jan 2025, Step 2 (16K) Jun 2024, Qwen-MT Plus Apr 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 Oct 4, 2026.
