Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini: The Ultimate Performance & Pricing Comparison

Deep dive into reasoning, benchmarks, and latency insights.

The Final Verdict in the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini Showdown

After a comprehensive analysis, Jamba 1.5 Mini emerges as the superior choice for users prioritizing raw intelligence and reasoning. However, Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) remains a highly competitive option, especially for scenarios demanding faster response times and cost-efficiency. This detailed Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini comparison will break down every critical metric to help you make the best decision.

Explore best-for scenarios•Let the AI Selector recommend next steps

Model Snapshot

Key decision metrics at a glance.

Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)

Other

Reasoning: 8
Coding: 1
Multimodal: 2
Long Context: 3
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.003
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: 84.68tokens/sec

Jamba 1.5 Mini

Other

Reasoning: 6
Coding: 6
Multimodal: 1
Long Context: 1
Blended Price / 1M tokens: $0.000
P95 Latency: 1000ms
Tokens per second: —

Overall Capabilities

The capability radar provides a holistic view of the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini matchup. This chart illustrates each model's strengths and weaknesses at a glance, forming a cornerstone of our Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini analysis.

This radar chart visually maps the core capabilities (reasoning, coding, math proxy, multimodal, long context) of `Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)` vs `Jamba 1.5 Mini`.

Benchmark Breakdown

For a granular look, this chart directly compares scores across standardized benchmarks. In the critical MMLU Pro test, a key part of the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini debate, Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) scores 80 against Jamba 1.5 Mini's 60. This data-driven approach is essential for any serious Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini comparison.

This grouped bar chart provides a side-by-side comparison for each benchmark metric.

Speed & Latency

Speed is a crucial factor in the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini decision for interactive applications. The metrics below highlight the trade-offs you should weigh before shipping to production.

Time to First Token

Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)300ms

Jamba 1.5 Mini300ms

Tokens per Second

Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning)84.68

Jamba 1.5 Mini46

Head to the playground to validate these results yourself

The Economics of Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini

Power is only one part of the equation. This Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini pricing analysis gives you a true sense of value.

Pricing Breakdown

Compare input and output pricing at a glance.

Real-World Cost Scenario

To process 1M input tokens and generate 250k output tokens, Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) would cost $0.003, whereas Jamba 1.5 Mini would cost $0.000. This practical calculation is vital for any developer considering the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini choice.

Review the complete pricing and packaging strategy

Which Model Wins the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini Battle for You?

Choose Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) if...

Your top priority is raw performance and capability.

You are working in a technical or scientific field requiring the highest accuracy.

Cost is a secondary concern to power in your Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini decision.

Choose Jamba 1.5 Mini if...

You need a highly responsive model for user-facing applications.

Your budget is a primary consideration in the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini choice.

You are developing at scale where operational costs are critical.

Explore all Best picks Use the AI Selector for a tailored recommendation

Your Questions about the Qwen3 VL 32B (Reasoning) vs Jamba 1.5 Mini Comparison

Review the full evaluation methodology · Read the latest analysis posts

Data source: https://artificialanalysis.ai/