Aquila 2 34B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Aquila 2 34B (2023) and Stockmark 2 100B Instruct (2025) are compact production models from Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence (BAAI) and Stockmark. Aquila 2 34B ships a 2k-token context window, while Stockmark 2 100B Instruct ships a 128k-token context window. This comparison covers specs, pricing, API access, capabilities, benchmarks, input and output token costs, and production fit for coding and agent workloads.
Stockmark 2 100B Instruct fits 64x more tokens; pick it for long-context work and Aquila 2 34B for tighter calls.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Aquila 2 34B | Stockmark 2 100B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Best for | general production evaluation | general production evaluation |
| Decision fit | General | Long context |
| Context window | 2k | 128k |
| Cheapest output | - | - |
| Provider routes | 0 tracked | 1 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 0 shared | 0 shared |
Decision tradeoffs
- Use Aquila 2 34B when your own prompt tests beat the comparison signals; the local data does not show a decisive standalone advantage yet.
- Stockmark 2 100B Instruct has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Stockmark 2 100B Instruct has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and route flexibility.
- Local decision data tags Stockmark 2 100B Instruct for Long context.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output route or tier on this page.
Aquila 2 34B
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Unavailable
No complete token price in local provider data
Cost delta unavailable until both models have sourced input and output token prices.
Switch friction
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Aquila 2 34B and Stockmark 2 100B Instruct; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
- No overlapping tracked provider route is sourced for Stockmark 2 100B Instruct and Aquila 2 34B; plan for SDK, billing, or endpoint changes.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2023-11-02 | 2025-06-01 |
| Context window | 2k | 128k |
| Parameters | 34B | 100B |
| Architecture | Decoder Only | Decoder Only |
| License | Proprietary | MITOSI-approved |
| Openness | Proprietary | Open source |
| Weights | Not released | Unknown |
| Code | Unknown | Unknown |
| Commercial use | Commercial use: conditional | Commercial use: permitted |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Aquila 2 34B | Stockmark 2 100B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | - | - |
| Output price | - | - |
| Providers | - |
Pricing not yet sourced for either model.
Capabilities
| Capability | Aquila 2 34B | Stockmark 2 100B Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | No |
| Multimodal | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No |
| JSON / Tool use | No | No |
| Structured outputs | No | No |
| Code execution | No | No |
| IDE integration | No | No |
| Computer use | No | No |
| Parallel agents | No | No |
Benchmarks
No shared benchmark scores are currently available for this pair.
Continue comparing
- ELYZA Japanese Llama 2 13B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- ELYZA Japanese Llama 2 7B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Hunyuan Hy3 Preview vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Xiaomi MiMo-V2.5 vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Together AI - Gemma 3n-e4B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Llama 2 7B vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- Aquila 2 34B vs Hunyuan Hy3 Preview
- Together AI - Llama 3 8B Lite vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
- GPT-1 vs Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Popular comparisons for Aquila 2 34B
Popular comparisons for Stockmark 2 100B Instruct
Last reviewed: 2026-09-08. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.