Model comparison

Qwen3-30B-A3B vs Sonar

Qwen3-30B-A3B and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.9 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Qwen3-30B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.9

Rank #179 Confirmed

Sonar Perplexity

38.5

Rank #187 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in math, where Qwen3-30B-A3B leads 37.4 to 33.7.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper at $0.12 / $0.50 per million input/output tokens, against $1 / $1 for Sonar.
  • Sonar accepts more context: 128K tokens versus 41K.
  • Qwen3-30B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Qwen3-30B-A3B and Sonar specifications
Qwen3-30B-A3BSonar
ProviderAlibaba (Qwen)Perplexity
Noometry Index38.938.5
Released2025-04-282024-01-01
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window41K128K
Max output16K4K
Input $ / M tokens$0.12$1
Output $ / M tokens$0.50$1
Results tracked327

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

Category by category

Coding Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.5 (#194), Sonar: 35.7 (#221)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
SciCode33.3%—
WeirdML29.8%—
LiveBench Coding—35.1%
LMArena Coding1416—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 29.8 (#82), Sonar: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard41.4%—

Reasoning Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 22.2 (#204), Sonar: 21.1 (#227)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
Kagi LLM Benchmark54.9%—
CritPt0.3%—
Chess Puzzles8%—
LiveBench Reasoning—46.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts1398—
DTBench69.3%—
LiveBench Data Analysis—37.9%
LMCA22.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index139.63—
LiveBench—46.9%

Math Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 37.4 (#157), Sonar: 33.7 (#200)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions47.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202570.3%—
LiveBench Math—41.6%
LMArena Math1394—

Knowledge Not comparable

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 41.8 (#105), Sonar: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
GPQA Diamond70.1%—
Confabulations12.3%—
LMArena Expert1396—

Multilingual Not comparable

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 49.5 (#132), Sonar: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
LMArena Non-English1372—
LMArena Chinese1433—
LMArena French1418—
LMArena German1380—
LMArena Japanese1337—
LMArena Korean1331—
LMArena Russian1370—
LMArena Spanish1404—

Instruction Following Too close to call

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 72.0 (#142), Sonar: 71.4 (#150)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
LiveBench Instruction Following—76.2%
LMArena Instruction Following1363—

Long Context Not comparable

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 31.0 (#283), Sonar: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
Fiction.LiveBench40.6%—
LMArena Longer Query1379—

Writing & Preference Qwen3-30B-A3B leads

Qwen3-30B-A3B: 55.6 (#143), Sonar: 52.6 (#167)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkQwen3-30B-A3BSonar
LMArena Text1384—
LMArena Creative Writing1317—
Short-Story Creative Writing75.3%—
LMArena Multi-Turn1378—
LiveBench Language—44.1%

Frequently asked questions

Is Qwen3-30B-A3B better than Sonar?

Qwen3-30B-A3B and Sonar score almost the same on the Noometry Index (38.9 vs 38.5), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3-30B-A3B or Sonar?

Qwen3-30B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.12 per million input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens; Sonar lists at $1 and $1.

Is Qwen3-30B-A3B or Sonar better for coding?

Qwen3-30B-A3B scores higher on coding benchmarks: 37.5 versus 35.7 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Sonar does, with 128K tokens against 41K.

How many benchmarks do Qwen3-30B-A3B and Sonar share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Qwen3-30B-A3B has 32 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.

Related comparisons

Go deeper