Llama 4 Maverick vs Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Compare Llama 4 Maverick by Meta AI against Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 by Qwen, context windows of 1.0M vs 262K, tested across 53 shared challenges. Updated June 2026.
Which is better, Llama 4 Maverick or Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507?
Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 are both competitive models. Llama 4 Maverick costs $1.5/M input tokens vs $0.071/M for Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507. Context windows: 1000K vs 262K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between Llama 4 Maverick and Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Llama 4 Maverick is made by meta while Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is from qwen. Llama 4 Maverick has a 1000K token context window compared to Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507's 262K. On pricing, Llama 4 Maverick costs $1.5/M input tokens vs $0.071/M for Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507.
Per 1M tokens
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is cheaper on both — 21× input, 8.8× output
No community votes yet. On paper, Llama 4 Maverick has the edge — bigger model tier, bigger context window, major provider backing.
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is 8.8x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Style Comparison
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 uses 67.9x more emoji
