Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning
Wins 2 of 7 areas
Coding · Images and charts
Wins 3 of 7 areas
Reasoning · Long documents · Following instructions
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning wins more areas, narrowly.Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is cheaper and better at images and charts.
Scores updated · 51 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking01Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning1 of 3 tests · 2 ties
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning1 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning1 of 1 test
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video60Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct6 of 6 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software21Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct2 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own11Even1 each
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct costs 23% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning pulls ahead
- Reasons across sets of long documentsAA-LCR+10points ahead
- Recent programming contest problemsLiveCodeBench v6+9.9points ahead
- Follows unfamiliar, precisely checkable instructionsIFBench+2.4points ahead
Where Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct pulls ahead
- Completes tasks by operating a computer desktopOSWorld-Verified+36.1points ahead
- Reads text in imagesOCRBench+8.1points ahead
- Code for real scientific research problemsSciCode+7.1points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 51 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
- LiveCodeBench v6Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 9.954.364.2+9.9
- SciCodeQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 7.135.928.8+7.1
- Terminal-Bench HardQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 1.56.85.3+1.5
AgentsEven
- OSWorld-VerifiedQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 36.166.730.6+36.1
- GDPValQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 1.66.78.3+1.6
ReasoningQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning
- Humanity's Last ExamQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 2.36.68.9+2.3
- GPQA Diamondtie71.272tie
- CritPttie00tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 3.420.316.9+3.4
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 1.88.410.2+1.8
Images and chartsQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
- OCRBenchQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 8.19283.9+8.1
- MMMU-ProQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 5.867.661.8+5.8
- CharXiv (RQ)Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 5.562.156.6+5.5
- BLINKQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 5.370.765.4+5.3
- MathVistaQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 384.981.9+3
- MMStarQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 2.978.475.5+2.9
Long documentsQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning
- AA-LCRQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 1032.742.7+10
Following instructionsQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning
- IFBenchQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 2.442.745.1+2.4
Other results33 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- SimpleQAQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 2851.923.9+28
- Arena-Hard-V2Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 20.777.456.7+20.7
- τ²-Bench Telecom (AA run)Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 15.235.119.9+15.2
- HMMT 2025Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 10.257.467.6+10.2
- LVBenchQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 8.567.759.2+8.5
- AIME 2025Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 8.474.783.1+8.4
- IFEvalQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 6.187.881.7+6.1
- ERQAQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 651.345.3+6
- IncludeQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 5.58074.5+5.5
- AA-OmniscienceQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 4.9-52.7-57.6+4.9
- ScreenSpot-Pro (No tools)Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 4.76257.3+4.7
- OCRBench v2_enQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 4.567.162.6+4.5
- CC-OCRQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 4.482.277.8+4.4
- AA Agentic IndexQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 4.219.114.9+4.2
- SuperGPQAQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 460.456.4+4
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 3.416.513.1+3.4
- InfoVQA_testQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 3.289.286+3.2
- AI2DQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 2.889.786.9+2.8
- HallusionBenchQwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning by 2.863.266+2.8
- MMMU (val) (Pass@1)Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 2.778.776+2.7
- CharadesSTAQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 2.164.862.7+2.1
- DocVQA_testQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 2.197.195+2.1
- RealWorldQAQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 1.979.377.4+1.9
- MMLU-ProXQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 1.777.876.1+1.7
- OCRBench v2 (Chinese)Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 1.461.860.4+1.4
- MMLU-ProQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 1.381.880.5+1.3
- MMLU-ReduxQwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct by 1.392.290.9+1.3
- BFCL v3tie67.768.6tie
- MATH-Visiontie66.565.7tie
- ScreenSpottie95.494.7tie
- MM MTBenchtie8.57.9tie
- AA Intelligencetie9.99.5tie
- VideoMMMUtie74.775tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning?
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning wins three of the seven areas where both have results: reasoning, long documents and following instructions. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct wins coding and images and charts, and costs 23% less. They are level on agents and facts.
Which is better for coding?
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct. It wins 2 of the 3 coding tests both models report; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning wins 1.
Which is cheaper?
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct costs $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Reasoning costs $0.20 and $2.40. That makes Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct about 23% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 51 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 18 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 33 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.