Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Stepfun-ai

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking vs Step 3.5 Flash

A detailed comparison of pricing, benchmarks, and capabilities

Get our weekly newsletter on pricing changes, new releases, and tools.

Join the Price Per Token Community

Key Takeaways

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens

Step 3.5 Flash wins:

  • Larger context window
  • Faster response time
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
Price Advantage
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking
Benchmark Advantage
Step 3.5 Flash
Context Window
Step 3.5 Flash
Speed
Step 3.5 Flash

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingStep 3.5 Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen3 Next 80B A3B ThinkingStep 3.5 Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenStepfun-ai
ReleasedSep 2025Jan 2026

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Step 3.5 Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Related Comparisons

Compare Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking with:

Compare Step 3.5 Flash with:

Frequently Asked Questions

Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking has cheaper input pricing at $0.10/M tokens. Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking has cheaper output pricing at $0.30/M tokens.
Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks with a score of 31.6, compared to Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking's score of N/A.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking has a 128,000 token context window, while Step 3.5 Flash has a 256,000 token context window.
Qwen3 Next 80B A3B Thinking does not support vision. Step 3.5 Flash does not support vision.