Price Per TokenPrice Per Token
Qwen
Qwen
vs
Stepfun-ai

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct 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 VL 30B A3B Instruct wins:

  • Faster response time
  • Better at math
  • Supports vision

Step 3.5 Flash wins:

  • Cheaper input tokens
  • Cheaper output tokens
  • Larger context window
  • Higher intelligence benchmark
  • Better at coding
  • Has reasoning mode
Price Advantage
Step 3.5 Flash
Benchmark Advantage
Step 3.5 Flash
Context Window
Step 3.5 Flash
Speed
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct

Pricing Comparison

Benchmark Comparison

Context & Performance

Capabilities

Feature Comparison

FeatureQwen3 VL 30B A3B InstructStep 3.5 Flash
Vision (Image Input)
Tool/Function Calls
Reasoning Mode
Audio Input
Audio Output
PDF Input
Prompt Caching
Web Search

License & Release

PropertyQwen3 VL 30B A3B InstructStep 3.5 Flash
LicenseOpen SourceOpen Source
AuthorQwenStepfun-ai
ReleasedOct 2025Jan 2026

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct Modalities

Input
textimage
Output
text

Step 3.5 Flash Modalities

Input
text
Output
text

Frequently Asked Questions

Step 3.5 Flash has cheaper input pricing at $0.10/M tokens. Step 3.5 Flash 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 VL 30B A3B Instruct's score of 14.3.
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct has a 131,072 token context window, while Step 3.5 Flash has a 256,000 token context window.
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct supports vision. Step 3.5 Flash does not support vision.