Qwen3-30B-A3B vs Qwen3.6-27B
Qwen3-30B-A3B (2025) and Qwen3.6-27B (2026) are agentic coding models from Alibaba. Qwen3-30B-A3B ships a 128K-token context window, while Qwen3.6-27B ships a 262K-token context window. On Google-Proof Q&A, Qwen3.6-27B leads by 26.2 pts. On pricing, Qwen3-30B-A3B costs $0.08/1M input tokens versus $0.32/1M for the alternative. This comparison covers specs, pricing, capabilities, benchmarks, provider availability, and production fit. It focuses on practical selection signals rather than broad model-family marketing.
Qwen3-30B-A3B is ~300% cheaper at $0.08/1M; pay for Qwen3.6-27B only for coding workflow support.
Decision scorecard
Local evidence first| Signal | Qwen3-30B-A3B | Qwen3.6-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Decision fit | RAG, Long context, and Classification | Coding, RAG, and Agents |
| Context window | 128K | 262K |
| Cheapest output | $0.28/1M tokens | $3.2/1M tokens |
| Provider routes | 3 tracked | 2 tracked |
| Shared benchmarks | 1 rows | Google-Proof Q&A leader |
Decision tradeoffs
- Qwen3-30B-A3B has the lower cheapest tracked output price at $0.28/1M tokens.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B has broader tracked provider coverage for fallback and procurement flexibility.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B uniquely exposes Structured outputs in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3-30B-A3B for RAG, Long context, and Classification.
- Qwen3.6-27B leads the largest shared benchmark signal on Google-Proof Q&A by 26.2 points.
- Qwen3.6-27B has the larger context window for long prompts, retrieval packs, or transcript analysis.
- Qwen3.6-27B uniquely exposes Vision, Multimodal, and Reasoning in local model data.
- Local decision data tags Qwen3.6-27B for Coding, RAG, and Agents.
Monthly cost at traffic
Estimate token spend from the cheapest tracked input and output prices on this page.
Qwen3-30B-A3B
$134
Cheapest tracked route: OpenRouter
Qwen3.6-27B
$1,056
Cheapest tracked route: OpenRouter
Estimated monthly gap: $922. Batch, cache, and negotiated pricing are excluded from this local estimate.
Switch friction
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Qwen3.6-27B is $2.92/1M tokens higher on cheapest tracked output pricing, so quality gains need to justify the spend.
- Check replacement coverage for Structured outputs before moving production traffic.
- Qwen3.6-27B adds Vision, Multimodal, and Reasoning in local capability data.
- Provider overlap exists on OpenRouter; start route-level A/B tests there.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B is $2.92/1M tokens lower on cheapest tracked output pricing before cache, batch, or negotiated discounts.
- Check replacement coverage for Vision, Multimodal, and Reasoning before moving production traffic.
- Qwen3-30B-A3B adds Structured outputs in local capability data.
Specs
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Released | 2025-04-28 | 2026-04-27 |
| Context window | 128K | 262K |
| Parameters | 30B | 27B |
| Architecture | mixture of experts | dense |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Apache 2.0 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | - |
Pricing and availability
| Pricing attribute | Qwen3-30B-A3B | Qwen3.6-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $0.08/1M tokens | $0.32/1M tokens |
| Output price | $0.28/1M tokens | $3.2/1M tokens |
| Providers |
Capabilities
| Capability | Qwen3-30B-A3B | Qwen3.6-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision | No | Yes |
| Multimodal | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Function calling | No | Yes |
| Tool use | No | Yes |
| Structured outputs | Yes | No |
| Code execution | No | No |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Qwen3-30B-A3B | Qwen3.6-27B |
|---|---|---|
| Google-Proof Q&A | 61.6 | 87.8 |
Deep dive
On shared benchmark coverage, Google-Proof Q&A has Qwen3-30B-A3B at 61.6 and Qwen3.6-27B at 87.8, with Qwen3.6-27B ahead by 26.2 points. The largest visible gap is 26.2 points on Google-Proof Q&A, which matters most when that benchmark mirrors your workload. Treat isolated benchmark wins as directional, because provider routing, prompt style, and tool access can move real application results.
The capability footprint differs most on vision: Qwen3.6-27B, multimodal input: Qwen3.6-27B, reasoning mode: Qwen3.6-27B, function calling: Qwen3.6-27B, tool use: Qwen3.6-27B, and structured outputs: Qwen3-30B-A3B. Both models share the core language-model surface, so the practical split is not just feature count. Use those differences to decide whether the page is about raw model quality, agentic coding support, multimodal ingestion, or predictable structured API behavior.
For cost, Qwen3-30B-A3B lists $0.08/1M input and $0.28/1M output tokens, while Qwen3.6-27B lists $0.32/1M input and $3.2/1M output tokens on the cheapest tracked provider. A 70/30 input-output blend puts Qwen3-30B-A3B lower by about $1.04 per million blended tokens. Availability is 3 providers versus 2, so concentration risk also matters.
Choose Qwen3-30B-A3B when provider fit, lower input-token cost, and broader provider choice are central to the workload. Choose Qwen3.6-27B when coding workflow support and larger context windows are more important. For production, rerun your own prompts through the exact provider, region, and tool stack you plan to ship.
FAQ
Which has a larger context window, Qwen3-30B-A3B or Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3.6-27B supports 262K tokens, while Qwen3-30B-A3B supports 128K tokens. That gap matters most for long documents, large codebases, retrieval-heavy agents, and conversations where earlier context must remain visible. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3-30B-A3B or Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper on tracked token pricing. Qwen3-30B-A3B costs $0.08/1M input and $0.28/1M output tokens. Qwen3.6-27B costs $0.32/1M input and $3.2/1M output tokens. Provider discounts or batch pricing can still change the final bill.
Is Qwen3-30B-A3B or Qwen3.6-27B open source?
Qwen3-30B-A3B is listed under Apache 2.0. Qwen3.6-27B is listed under Apache 2.0. License labels affect whether you can self-host, redistribute weights, or rely only on hosted APIs, so confirm the upstream license before deployment.
Which is better for vision, Qwen3-30B-A3B or Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3.6-27B has the clearer documented vision signal in this comparison. If vision is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ. Use this as a quick comparison signal, then confirm the provider-specific limits before committing to production.
Which is better for multimodal input, Qwen3-30B-A3B or Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3.6-27B has the clearer documented multimodal input signal in this comparison. If multimodal input is mission-critical, validate it against the provider endpoint because model-level support and API-level exposure can differ.
Where can I run Qwen3-30B-A3B and Qwen3.6-27B?
Qwen3-30B-A3B is available on OpenRouter, Fireworks AI, and AWS Bedrock. Qwen3.6-27B is available on OpenRouter and Alibaba Cloud PAI-EAS. Provider coverage can affect latency, region availability, compliance posture, and fallback options.
Continue comparing
Last reviewed: 2026-05-20. Data sourced from public model cards and provider documentation.