Compare / Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Nova Pro 1.0
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 vs Nova Pro 1.0
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 21 results on 3 sources that measured both models.
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 or Nova Pro 1.0? The short answer
- Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 is cheaper: $0.14 against $1.40 per million tokens, 9.8 times less.
- They score about the same on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (7.5 and 7.0).
- On our business benchmarks, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 ranks higher for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge and writing.
At a glance
| Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 | Nova Pro 1.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $0.090 in · $0.30 out | $0.80 in · $3.20 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $0.14 | $1.40 |
| Cheapest host, blended | $0.084 (StreamLake) | $1.40 (Amazon Bedrock) |
| Intelligence Index | 7.5 | 7.0 |
| Spring Prompt overall | – | – |
| Output speed, tokens a second | – | – |
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 300,000 tokens |
| Weights | Open | Closed |
| Developer based in | China | the US |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among models available today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. The better rank is in green.
| Use case | Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 | Nova Pro 1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls | 72 of 161 | 152 of 161 |
| Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge | 156 of 195 | 186 of 195 |
| WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality | 139 of 187 | 173 of 187 |
| Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers | not measured | 11 of 153 |
Every shared result
| Benchmark | Metric | Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 | Nova Pro 1.0 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Business, management and financeArena rating | 1,397 | 1,279 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Creative writingArena rating | 1,319 | 1,237 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Expert promptsArena rating | 1,395 | 1,273 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Instruction followingArena rating | 1,366 | 1,277 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | OverallArena rating | 1,383 | 1,290 |
| Arena (formerly LMArena)reported | Writing, literature and languageArena rating | 1,342 | 1,274 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score | 7.50 | 7.00 |
| Artificial Analysisreported | GPQA Diamond% of questions | 65.9% | 49.9% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Humanity's Last Exam% of questions | 6.9% | 3.2% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | IFBench% of instructions | 33.1% | 38.1% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions | 26.3% | 21.0% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Terminal-Bench Hard% of tasks | 6.1% | 6.1% |
| Artificial Analysisreported | Τ²-bench telecom% of tasks | 10.2% | 14.0% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Irrelevance detection% correct | 79.9% | 70.1% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Memory% correct | 17.6% | 1.9% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Multi-turn tasks% correct | 30.0% | 1.9% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Overall accuracy% correct | 41.4% | 25.0% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Relevance detection% correct | 93.8% | 93.8% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Single-turn calls (curated)% correct | 88.9% | 86.6% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Single-turn calls (user-contributed)% correct | 78.4% | 78.5% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4reported | Web search% correct | 22.5% | 2.5% |
Bold green marks the better value on that metric. Where a source reports ranges that overlap, the difference may not be meaningful; see the benchmark page for ranges.
Quick answers
Is Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 better than Nova Pro 1.0?
It depends on the task. Among models available today, on our benchmarks and licensed sources, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 ranks higher for agents and tool use, reasoning and knowledge and writing.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 or Nova Pro 1.0?
Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 costs $0.14 per million tokens (three input to one output), against $1.40 for Nova Pro 1.0.
Run Qwen3 30B A3B Instruct 2507 and Nova Pro 1.0 on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.