Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B
Compare Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B, both from Qwen, context windows of 262K vs 262K, tested across 40 shared challenges. Updated February 2026.
What is the difference between Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Both are developed by Qwen but target different use cases. Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 has a 262K token context window vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B's 262K. You can compare their actual outputs across 40 challenges on RIVAL to see how they differ in practice.
Which is better, Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 or Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
It depends on your use case. Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B each have strengths in different areas. RIVAL lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 40 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
How much does Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 cost compared to Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B?
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 costs $0.071/M input tokens and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B costs $0.6/M input tokens. Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is $0.53/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on RIVAL to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
How can I compare Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B on RIVAL?
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 397B A17B across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output, and Pro users can create custom challenges to test both models with their own prompts.