Compare/Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct vs Reka Flash 3

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B InstructvsReka Flash 3

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

Alibaba

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct

Input
$0.2/M
Output
$0.8/M
Speed
109 tok/s
TTFT
2.14s
Reka AI

Reka Flash 3

Input
$0.2/M
Output
$0.8/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
Tie
Faster (tok/s)
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
Lower Latency
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
Benchmarks (1-0)
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct

Pricing Comparison

MetricQwen3 VL 30B A3B InstructReka Flash 3
Input ($/M tokens)$0.2$0.2
Output ($/M tokens)$0.8$0.8
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct$0.28
Reka Flash 3$0.28

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
109 tok/s
Reka Flash 3
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct
2.14s
Reka Flash 3

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct wins the overall benchmark matchup 1–0 across 1 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.

Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Reka Flash 3 is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Reka Flash 3 makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct is strongest on Intelligence Index (9.9). Reka Flash 3 leads on Intelligence Index (3.7).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. Alibaba and Reka AI sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: Alibaba tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Reka AI often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct costs $18.00 ($216/year); Reka Flash 3 costs $18.00 ($216/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct ≈ $2.60/run, Reka Flash 3 ≈ $2.60/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct ≈ $120/run, Reka Flash 3 ≈ $120/run.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
9.93.7
Coding Index
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct1 wins
0 winsReka Flash 3

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct or Reka Flash 3?

Both models have similar pricing. Check the detailed breakdown above for input vs output token costs.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct wins 1 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Reka Flash 3. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct generates tokens faster at 109 tok/s vs — tok/s. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct also has lower time-to-first-token (2.14s vs —s).

When should I use Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct vs Reka Flash 3?

Choose based on your priorities: both are similarly priced, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct for stronger benchmark performance, and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Instruct for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.