Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 vs Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash
Compare Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash, both from Qwen, context windows of 262K vs 1.0M, tested across 53 shared challenges. Updated May 2026.
Which is better, Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 or Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash?
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash are both competitive models. Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 costs $0.071/M input tokens vs $0.1/M for Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash. Context windows: 262K vs 1000K tokens. Compare their real outputs side by side below.
Key Differences Between Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 and Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is made by qwen while Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash is from qwen. Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 has a 262K token context window compared to Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash's 1000K. On pricing, Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 costs $0.071/M input tokens vs $0.1/M for Qwen: Qwen3.5 Flash.
Per 1M tokens
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 is cheaper on both — 1.4× input, 1.4× output
No community votes yet. On paper, these are closely matched - try both with your actual task to see which fits your workflow.
Style Comparison
Qwen3 30B A3B Thinking 2507 uses 26.6x more emoji
