Sonar vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
Updated October 21, 2026. 5 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Sonar has the edge where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
- Shared results
- 5
- Sonar only
- 0
- Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct only
- 5
- Like-for-like categories
- 4 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct leads, 7.9 against 7.7.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct takes 262K tokens against 127K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
Sonar $0.0015, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct $0.0006 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Sonar not benchmarked, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Coding, 40.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run): Sonar 29.5% against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct 69.7%, 40.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Sonar $1.00 against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct $0.70 per million output tokens, 1.4x apart.
- Context window
- Sonar takes 127K tokens, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct 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.
| Category | Sonar | Bars | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 0 | 1 | ||
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| Reasoning | 0 | 2 | ||
| Knowledge | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 5 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 29.5% | 69.7% | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 6.1% | Only Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 7.7 | 7.9 | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct |
| 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
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 19.9% | Only Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 47.1% | 72.0% | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.9% | 8.9% | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Math Index | Not measured | 82.3 | Only Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 82.3% | Only Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 68.9% | 80.7% | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct |
| Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBench | Not measured | 45.1% | Only Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 45 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct 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.
| Specification | Perplexity Sonar | Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Perplexity | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | January 27, 2025 | October 6, 2025 |
| Context window | 127K | 262K |
| Input $/Mtok | $1.00 | $0.20 |
| Output $/Mtok | $1.00 | $0.70 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Sonar better than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Sonar has the edge where what matters is LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Sonar or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct?
Sonar costs $1.00 per million input tokens and $1.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct costs $0.20 and $0.70. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Sonar or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct?
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct, with 262K tokens against 127K.
How many benchmarks is the Sonar vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct comparison based on?
5 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Sonar's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.