Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview 05-20 (thinking) vs Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Compare Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview 05-20 (thinking) by Google AI against Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 by Qwen, context windows of 1.0M vs 131K, tested across 12 shared challenges.
Our Verdict
Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview 05-20 (thinking)
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
No community votes yet. On paper, these are closely matched - try both with your actual task to see which fits your workflow.
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 is 4.4x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Too close to call
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview 05-20 (thinking)
Input
$0.15
1.3× cheaper
Output
$3.50
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
Input
$0.20
Output
$0.80
4.4× cheaper
Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview 05-20 (thinking) wins input (1.3× cheaper)·Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 wins output (4.4× cheaper)
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
39%
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 uses 52.2x more hedging
Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview 05-20 (thinking)
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507
70%Vocabulary55%
11wSentence Length18w
0.00Hedging0.52
4.2Bold6.7
7.3Lists4.3
0.00Emoji1.04
0.00Headings0.92
0.00Transitions0.11
Based on 3 + 22 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
