Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
Compare Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B, both from Qwen, context windows of 262K vs 262K, tested across 53 shared challenges.
Our Verdict
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
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 Thinking 2507 is 11x cheaper per token — worth considering if cost matters.
Too close to call
API pricing
Cost per 1M tokens
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Input
$0.07
5.6× cheaper
Output
$0.28
11× cheaper
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
Input
$0.40
Output
$3.20
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is cheaper on both — 5.6× input, 11× output
Writing DNA
Style Comparison
Similarity
66%
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 uses 6.5x more emoji
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507
Qwen: Qwen3.5 122B A10B
54%Vocabulary49%
14wSentence Length15w
0.12Hedging0.29
7.5Bold6.2
4.2Lists4.8
0.68Emoji0.10
0.93Headings0.88
0.12Transitions0.20
Based on 16 + 24 text responses
Research
What we learned reading every model
FAQ
