Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

LongCat 2.0 leads Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 19.1 to 9.5, and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs 1.2x less per output token ($1.00 vs $1.20 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace LongCat 2.0 Replace Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
LongCat 2.0Meituan
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
1
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
0
vs boards won of 1 shared

LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick LongCat 2.0 for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Model ALongCat 2.0MeituanNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BQwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingQwenNot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
1
LongCat 2.0 only
7
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking only
0
Like-for-like categories
1 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
LongCat 2.0 not benchmarked, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking not benchmarked.
Widest category
Intelligence, 9.6 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Intelligence Index: LongCat 2.0 19.1 against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking 9.5, 9.6 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
LongCat 2.0 $1.20 against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking $1.00 per million output tokens, 1.2x apart.
Context window
LongCat 2.0 takes 1.05M tokens, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking 262K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryLongCat 2.0BarsQwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingTies
Intelligence10
All shared boards10
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index3 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Coding Index45.3Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
SciCode36.3%Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
ALE-Bench793.5Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Intelligence Index19.19.5LongCat 2.0
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Agentic Index14.0Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 41 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)33.7%Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
Neither model has a result on 14 boards here
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
Neither model has a result on 20 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
General benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.0%Not measuredOnly LongCat 2.0 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 47 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkLongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

LongCat 2.0$0.0009Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking$0.0008Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

LongCat 2.0$0.019Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking$0.018Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

LongCat 2.0$0.072Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking$0.068Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of LongCat 2.0 and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
SpecificationMeituan LongCat 2.0Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
MakerMeituanQwen
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedJuly 20, 2026October 6, 2025
Context window1.05M262K
Input $/Mtok$0.30$0.29
Output $/Mtok$1.20$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is LongCat 2.0 better than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick LongCat 2.0 for a larger context window (1.05M against 262K tokens).

Which is cheaper, LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

LongCat 2.0 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $1.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs $0.29 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, LongCat 2.0 or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

LongCat 2.0, with 1.05M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks is the LongCat 2.0 vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking comparison based on?

1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. LongCat 2.0's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next