0 providers50 models

Model crosswalk

Side-by-side on price, capability and workload — three-way comparison.

Qwen 3 32B Instruct
vs
Yi 1.5 34B Chat
vs
Yi 1.5 9B Chat
Qwen 3 32B InstructA

Qwen 3 32B Instruct

32B params · 131K context · qwen

Cheapest provideropenrouter
$/1M input$140000.00
$/1M output$550000.00
Yi 1.5 34B ChatB

Yi 1.5 34B Chat

34B params · 4K context · apache-2.0

Cheapest provider
$/1M input
$/1M output
Yi 1.5 9B ChatC

Yi 1.5 9B Chat

9B params · 4K context · apache-2.0

Cheapest provider
$/1M input
$/1M output
Specs and cheapest providers
SpecQwen 3 32B InstructYi 1.5 34B ChatYi 1.5 9B Chat
Parameters32B34B9B
Context window131K tokens🏆4K tokens4K tokens
Licenseqwenapache-2.0apache-2.0
Released2025-04-282024-05-132024-05-13
Cheapest provider
Provideropenrouter
Input / 1M tokens$140000.00
Output / 1M tokens$550000.00
Benchmark comparison

No benchmark data available yet.

Editor's take
Qwen 3 32B Instruct, Yi 1.5 34B Chat, and Yi 1.5 9B Chat all come from Chinese AI labs — Alibaba's Qwen team and 01.AI respectively — and all target bilingual English/Chinese production use. The models are separated by about a year in release date and a substantial generation in architecture: the Yi 1.5 series launched May 2024, while Qwen 3 arrived in 2025 with a redesigned instruction-tuning pipeline and a dramatically extended context window. Yi 1.5 9B Chat offers solid English and Chinese performance for its 9B scale. MMLU sits around 69.5, competitive at release in mid-2024. The 4K context ceiling is the hard constraint: it disqualifies the model for most RAG pipelines and any document-length task. Apache 2.0 licensing makes it a clean fine-tuning base for bilingual workloads where those context limits are acceptable. Yi 1.5 34B Chat scales to 34B parameters and delivers competitive MT-Bench and CMMLU scores. The 4K context ceiling is identical to the 9B variant, disqualifying it for modern RAG pipelines. By mid-2025, Qwen 2.5 and DeepSeek V2 in the same size class moved ahead on both context and benchmark numbers. Yi 1.5 34B is relevant mainly where Apache 2.0 licensing and specific bilingual pretraining distributions are both required. Qwen 3 32B Instruct is the current-generation comparison point. At 32B parameters with 131K context and the Qwen 3 multilingual instruction-tuning improvements, it outperforms both Yi models on general benchmarks and handles document-length tasks neither Yi model can attempt. The Qwen license permits commercial use. The trade-off is that Qwen 3 is not Apache 2.0, so teams with strict OSI-license requirements may still favor Yi 1.5. Pick Yi 1.5 9B for low-scale bilingual tasks with an Apache 2.0 requirement. Pick Yi 1.5 34B when Apache 2.0 and 34B-class quality are both needed within a 4K context budget. Pick Qwen 3 32B for any workload that needs modern long-context handling or current-generation benchmark quality.
Compare two at a time
Frequently asked questions
How does Qwen 3 32B Instruct compare to Yi 1.5 34B Chat and Yi 1.5 9B Chat on price?
Use the table above to compare input and output prices per 1M tokens across the cheapest available providers for each model.
Which model is best for coding: Qwen 3 32B Instruct, Yi 1.5 34B Chat, or Yi 1.5 9B Chat?
HumanEval and other code benchmarks are shown in the table. For production code tasks, also consider context window size and provider latency.
What is the context window for Qwen 3 32B Instruct, Yi 1.5 34B Chat, and Yi 1.5 9B Chat?
Context window sizes are listed in the Specs row of the comparison table above.
Full model details