Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)vsSolar Pro 4
Updated Aug 2026

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)vsSolar Pro 4

Solar Pro 4 is cheaper than Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) at $0.09/M vs $0.4/M input tokens.

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) and Solar Pro 4 compared across 13 shared prompts
SpecQwen Plus 0728 (thinking)Solar Pro 4
Input price$0.4/M tokens$0.09/M tokens
Output price$4/M tokens$0.36/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens524K tokens
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2025Aug 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 13 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Ethical Dilemma with Stakeholders

You're the CEO of a pharmaceutical company. Your best-selling drug ($2B annual revenue, used by 4 million patients for chronic pain) has…

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,485 words
48-Hour Crisis Action Plan: Prioritizing Patients, Ethics, and Sustainable Trust Core Principle: Patient safety is non-negotiable. Delaying action based on financial fear risks catastrophic legal liability, irreversible reputational damage, regulatory wrath, and profound ethical failure.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,851 words
As CEO, my overriding duty is to balance patient safety, legal/regulatory compliance, fiduciary responsibility, and long-term corporate survival. A 1-in-8,000 risk of liver failure is rare but severe, potentially fatal, and materially unexpected relative to the current label.
Read the full answer

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,224 words
Here's a comprehensive analysis of the architecture's failure modes, race conditions, and bottlenecks, with specific solutions and trade-offs: 1. Sync Strategy: Client Timestamps + Last-Write-Wins (LWW) Failure Mode/Race Condition: Clock Skew: Client clocks are unreliable (e.g., user's laptop time off by minutes).
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,598 words
This architecture contains several fundamental mismatches between real-time collaborative editing requirements and the chosen patterns. Below is a systematic breakdown of failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks, each with a targeted solution and explicit trade-offs.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)644 words
Based on a rigorous analysis of neuroscience, market realities, and startup best practices, here are the 3 weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, with evidence-backed critiques and concrete fixes: Weakest Claim #1: Slide 1 Vision – "Predicts what you want to type *before you think it*" Why it's weak: Violates…
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,009 words
Here are the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, along with an analysis of why they undermine credibility and specific recommendations for improvement. The Technical Performance Claim Claim: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy...
Read the full answer

Explain Like I'm a Specific Expert

Explain how a large language model (like GPT or Claude) learns and generates text to each of these three audiences: 1. **An experienced…

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,200 words
For the Experienced Software Engineer (Skeptical Builder) Forget "next word prediction" as a simplistic heuristic—it's the emergent consequence of a massively parallel, distributed state machine solving a high-dimensional compression problem.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,062 words
The Experienced Software Engineer Think of the model not as a reasoning engine, but as a highly compressed, non-deterministic function approximator that maps a sequence of input tokens to a probability distribution over the next token.
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)282 words
Crispy Chickpea Pantry Pasta Sweet or savory? Savory with a zesty kick! Total time: 15 minutes Serves: 2 Why it works: Uses pantry staples to create a crunchy, garlicky, umami-packed meal with zero fresh produce needed. The chickpeas get incredibly crispy, and lemon juice (bottled) adds bright freshness.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 4294 words
🍝 Golden Umami Silk Noodles A savory-sweet pasta dish that transforms basic pantry staples into a glossy, flavorful meal. It's quick, comforting, and relies on the balance of soy, honey, and butter for a rich sauce without needing fresh produce.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)1,714 words
The Transistor in 1920: A World Transformed by 1980 (A Counterfactual History) The invention of a functional point-contact transistor (likely germanium-based, given 1920s materials science) in 1920 wouldn't immediately spark a revolution.
Read the full answer
Solar Pro 41,638 words
The Premise: The 1920 Solid-State Breakthrough For this scenario to function, we must assume a functional point-contact or junction transistor is demonstrated in 1920 (perhaps by Lilienfeld or an early Bell Labs precursor), and crucially, that methods for purifying semiconductor materials (germanium/silicon) are solved…
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Solar Pro 4
Solar Pro 4

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Solar Pro 4 costs 11x less per token.

Too close to call
API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)
Input
$0.40
Output
$4.00
Solar Pro 4
Input
$0.09
4.4× cheaper
Output
$0.36
11× cheaper

Solar Pro 4 is cheaper on both: 4.4× input, 11× output.

Where to run it

1 host

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Solar Pro 41 host
HostInOutContextUptime
UUpstage$0.09 in·$0.36 out·524k·99.7% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 23 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) is developed by Qwen while Solar Pro 4 is developed by Upstage. Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) has a 1.0M token context window vs Solar Pro 4's 524K. You can compare their actual outputs across 13 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) and Solar Pro 4 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 13 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) costs $0.4/M input tokens and Solar Pro 4 costs $0.09/M input tokens. Solar Pro 4 is $0.31/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) and Solar Pro 4 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoDeepSeek V4 Flash Vision Exp logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision ExpLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoHy3 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Hy3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoQwen3.7 Flash logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Qwen3.7 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoLing 3.0 Flash logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Ling 3.0 FlashLanded Sep 2026
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Muse Glimmer 30BLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoGLM 5.3 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs GLM 5.3Landed Sep 2026
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoTernary Bonsai 2 27B logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27BLanded Sep 2026
Solar Pro 4 logoGLM 5.3 Flash logo
Solar Pro 4 vs GLM 5.3 FlashLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoQwen3.8 Flash logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Qwen3.8 FlashSame lab
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logoQwen3.8 Max (0902) logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Same lab
Solar Pro 4 logoSolar Pro 3 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Solar Pro 3Same lab
Solar Pro 4 logoOx Alpha logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Ox AlphaSame size
Solar Pro 4 logoClaude Sonnet 5 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Claude Sonnet 5Same size
Solar Pro 4 logoCypher Alpha (free) logo
Solar Pro 4 vs Cypher Alpha (free)Same size
Solar Pro 4 logoDeepSeek V3.1 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs DeepSeek V3.1New provider
Solar Pro 4 logoDeepSeek R1 logo
Solar Pro 4 vs DeepSeek R1Same size

Model pages

Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) logo
Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)37 outputs, specs and price
Solar Pro 4 logo
Solar Pro 414 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed