| Signal | Qwen Plus 0728 | Delta | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 50 | -17 | |
Pricing | 1 | -- | |
Context window size | 95 | -- | |
Recency | 95 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 75 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 5 | 1 wins |
6
days higher
6
days
18
days higher
Alibaba
Alibaba
| Metric | Qwen Plus 0728 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 40 | -- |
| Rank | #200 | #199 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
| Quality Rank | #200 | #199 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
| Adoption Rank | #200 | #199 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1000K | 1000K | -- |
| Pricing | $0.26/$0.78/M | $0.26/$0.78/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 50 | 67 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
| Pricing | 1 | 1 | Qwen Plus 0728 |
| Context window size | 95 | 95 | Qwen Plus 0728 |
| Recency | 95 | 95 | Qwen Plus 0728 |
| Output Capacity | 75 | 75 | Qwen Plus 0728 |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 40/100 (rank #200), placing it in the top 31% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #199), placing it in the top 32% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. Qwen Plus 0728 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (1000K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.78/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Qwen Plus 0728 and Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
Qwen Plus 0728
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Qwen Plus 0728
0% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Qwen Plus 0728
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Qwen Plus 0728
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Qwen Plus 0728
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Alibaba
| Capability | Qwen Plus 0728 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input) | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Alibaba
Alibaba
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | Qwen Plus 0728 | Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 1M | 1M |
| Max Output Tokens | 32,768 | 32,768 |
| Open Source | No | No |
| Created | Sep 8, 2025 | Sep 8, 2025 |
Both Qwen Plus 0728 and Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) score 40/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
Qwen Plus 0728 is ranked #200 and Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) is ranked #199 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
Qwen Plus 0728 is cheaper at $0.78/M output tokens vs Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)'s $0.78/M output tokens - 1.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: Qwen Plus 0728 at $0.26/M vs Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking) at $0.26/M.
Qwen Plus 0728 has a larger context window of 1,000,000 tokens compared to Qwen Plus 0728 (thinking)'s 1,000,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.