Model comparison

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview vs Qwen3-30B-A3B

Qwen3-30B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview Amazon

33.4

Rank #244 Reported

Qwen3-30B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.9

Rank #179 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Nova 2.0 Pro Preview scores higher in 2 categories and Qwen3-30B-A3B in 1 category; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in agentic & tool use, where Qwen3-30B-A3B leads 29.8 to 21.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 42.7% for Nova 2.0 Pro Preview and 33.3% for Qwen3-30B-A3B.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview and Qwen3-30B-A3B specifications
Nova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
ProviderAmazonAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index33.438.9
Released2025-12-022025-04-28
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—41K
Max output—16K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.12
Output $ / M tokens—$0.50
Results tracked332

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Nova 2.0 Pro Preview leads

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 40.8 (#133), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
SciCode42.7%33.3%
WeirdML—29.8%
LMArena Coding—1416

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 21.9 (#136), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—41.4%
GDP.pdf2%—

Reasoning Too close to call

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: 22.4 (#194), Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
CritPt0%0.3%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
Chess Puzzles—8%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1398
DTBench—69.3%
LMCA—22.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—139.63

Math Not comparable

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—47.8%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—70.3%
LMArena Math—1394

Knowledge Not comparable

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
GPQA Diamond—70.1%
Confabulations—12.3%
LMArena Expert—1396

Multilingual Not comparable

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Non-English—1372
LMArena Chinese—1433
LMArena French—1418
LMArena German—1380
LMArena Japanese—1337
LMArena Korean—1331
LMArena Russian—1370
LMArena Spanish—1404

Instruction Following Not comparable

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following—1363

Long Context Not comparable

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
Fiction.LiveBench—40.6%
LMArena Longer Query—1379

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview: —, Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkNova 2.0 Pro PreviewQwen3-30B-A3B
LMArena Text—1384
LMArena Creative Writing—1317
Short-Story Creative Writing—75.3%
LMArena Multi-Turn—1378

Frequently asked questions

Is Nova 2.0 Pro Preview better than Qwen3-30B-A3B?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is the stronger model overall, scoring 38.9 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Nova 2.0 Pro Preview or Qwen3-30B-A3B better for coding?

Nova 2.0 Pro Preview scores higher on coding benchmarks: 40.8 versus 37.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Nova 2.0 Pro Preview and Qwen3-30B-A3B share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Nova 2.0 Pro Preview has 3 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32.

Related comparisons

Go deeper